User talk:LittleLazyLass

Welcome!

Hello, Capra walie, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Getting started
• Introduction to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

If you are interesting in me showing you around coding stuff such as taxoboxes and cladograms, feel free to contact my talk page, just like I said on your IPs talk page. Also, if you are interested in a more all-round wikipedian mentoring you, feel free to visit WP:Adopt-a-user, or, if you have questions about wikipedia policies please visit WP:Teahouse. Any questions about dinosaur articles or references can be added to WT:DINO. Hope you enjoy editing as a user - IJReid (talk) 01:09, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of creatures in Primeval

As a recent contributor at List of creatures in Primeval your input to a discussion at Talk:List of creatures in Primeval#Removal of substantial amounts of content would be appreciated. Thank you. --AussieLegend (✉) 17:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lourinha Formation paleobiota

Hi Capra. I am currently working on an illustration of the Lourinha Formation including the dinosaurs Dinheirosaurus lourinhanensis, Torvosaurus gurneyi, Allosaurus europaeus, Draconyx loureiroi, and Lusotitan atalaiensis. I am not asking for your critique on this, as I will post it on the image review page once the pencil version is done, but I was wondering what other organisms (plants, mammals, other dinosaurs) should be added to the image. An extremely bad image of this so far can be found here (note, the actual image is reversed). The Lusotitan and Draconyx, in successive order from right closer to left farther (on the real image). Are there any taxa to add to the image, or any minor comments at this stage? Just wondering, but is a collaboration between us on the Lourinha page and taxa possible, although noting that I will be on vacation from the 13th to the 21st, because some genera, like Dinheirosaurus, are actually quite close to being good articles soon? IJReid (talk) 02:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I have now also put online a newer version of my current illustration, although the resolution is still crappy. The link is here. IJReid (talk) 02:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. As for notes on the current state, perhaps adding one or two more Lusotitan behind the current one, representing a small herd, as opposed to a loner. Adding another Draconyx with the current one as well. The only other thing I would think to change about the current creatures would be that the living Torvosaurus would be looking up at the Dinheirosaurus as opposed to tending to it's dead/dying relative (Sibling? Parent? Mate?). As for other taxa, I'd try not to overcrowd the image, so maybe some Dryosaurus, and a Miragaia or Dacentrurus. Also, it may be odd to have the Allosaurus and Torvosaurus attacking the same sauropod, so maybe have the Allosaurus attacking Dryosaurus or Miragaia/Dacentrurus mentioned above. Just some ideas thought. As for non-dinosaurs and plants, I've not gotten to the point of researching Lourinha Formation flora or non-dinosaur fauna yet, so I'm not sure. I'll have to get back to you on that, thought ferns and generic conifers are a safe bet for now.

As for collaboration, I'm open to the idea. Perhaps you could more work on the taxa pages, to avoid any edit conflicts. First thing that needs attending to, I don't think the Richardoestesia page makes any mention that Jurassic Portuguese material from various formations has been assigned to it, so make mention of that, thought note that the identification is tentative and the teeth probably don't belong to it but an unknown relative. Don't bother with the Deltapodus page thought, I plan on re-doing (i.e. essentially writing.) that page after I finish with Lourinha anyway. All references in the article are open access papers except 1 and 3, and the addtional references section, so there should be plenty of sources to go off of. Thought if you can find any more open access refs for Lusotitan or Lourinhasaurus that would be greatly appreciated.

Also, FYI, I've had a username change from Capra walie to Lusotitan.

Thanks. Lusotitan (talk) 14:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Luso. I have updated the image again, and again, when using my webcam the image appeared with a crappy resolution. The link is here. I have taken some of your requests into consideration, and have some comments on them. I haven't yet added more Lusotitan, Draconyx, or other ornithischians, but I think the Ornithischians will be in a herd together, as suggested by the paired footprints of ornithopods and stegosaurs. I think I will keep the theropods as they are, because what if the Allosaurus was attacking the Dinheirosaurus, which made the Dinheirosaurus rear up, an then the sauropod mistook some passing Torvosaurus as attacking, so it squished one of them. The Torvosaurus doesn't want to become aggressive with the Dinheirosaurus, as the Allosaurus is stronger, more powerful, larger, and bulkier than it, and it wouldn't end well for the Torvosaurus. On the left side of my image is a broken tree trunk with a pterosaur walking along it. I will say the pterosaur is Harpactognathus, which is found in the Morrison, so it is possible its range included Portugal. The pterosaur will be waiting for a partially exposed lizard to come fully out of the log to eat it. I have also added another tree that is possible to have existed in the Lourinha Formation behind the will be herd of ornithischians. I will start our collaboration as soon as the pencil image is done and I have completed User:Reid,iain james/Draft:Parasaurolophus, which you can help on as well. Bye for now, IJReid (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Torvosaurus guryeni is actually larger then Allosaurus europaeus, but I assume these are not full grown then, so no problem I guess. However, I have thought of, not a problem, but an idea. Replacing the Dinheirosaurus with a Zby. As it is currently, all of the fauna have very close relatives in the Morrison. And although it is correct the two formations are very similar, including in fauna, there are differences. The two big faunal differences that come to mind are the lack of low browsing sauropods (Maybe. Complicated issue.) and the presence of a turiasaur. Having a Miragaia and Zby will do a great job at representing that the formation is unique. Just an idea.Lusotitan (talk) 16:53, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Disambiguation link notification for March 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Erpetonyx, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pennsylvanian. 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) 09:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Protohippus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Calippus. 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, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of dinosaur genera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lepidus. 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) 10:55, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 17

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sinopeltosaurus, 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) 10:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Hello, I'm Oshwah. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Dandakosaurus  with this edit, without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of dinosaur genera, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diceratops. 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) 11:17, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

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

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

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

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 02:40, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Matheronodon) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Matheronodon, Lusotitan!

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

This has been tagged for one issue and has one empty section.

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

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 07:28, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Hi -- I noticed when reading one of your recent comments that you don't have a link to your user page or user talk page in your signature. This is rather an nuisance for other editors -- see WP:SIGLINK for the relevant guideline. Would you mind putting a link back into your signature? Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lusotitan, I see you haven't changed your signature. Would you mind adding a link? Per WP:SIGLINK, it is regarded as obstructive not to have a link to your user page or talk page in your signature. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add one? Lusotitan 19:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Go to Special:Preferences and you'll see the Signature section on the User profile tab. There are instructions there; if you get stuck leave a note here and I can help. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Lusotitan. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Signature again

Lusotitan, I see you still haven't added a link to your user page in your signature. Can you take another look at the section above and let me know if you need help doing this? See WP:SIGLINK for the reason why this should be done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)`[reply]

Still don't have two clues how to do it. Lusotitan 22:54, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I can't do it for you directly, but I can tell you what to do. Go to Special:Preferences, and about halfway down you'll see an input box that says "Signature:". Copy everything in the box, and post it here, but do it like this:

<nowiki>...</nowiki>

with whatever's in that input box where I put the dots. (If you don't put it in those "nowiki" tags, it'll convert the text to your signature, which is not what I need to see.) I'll then be able to tell you what to put into that box to fix it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:29, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, does it work now? Lusotitan' 03:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's much better -- it now links to your user page. Thank you for doing that. A lot of people like to leave a link to their talk page, instead of, or as well as, the link to their user page, since it's usually the talk page they want to get to. But that's up to you. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 03:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:36, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heads Up

Just to let you know, that IP that added that "Extinct animals of Korea" category to various articles is a long-term vandal who haunts that IP range, spamming articles with inappropriate, nonexistent, and nonexistent and inappropriate categories. The standard procedure is to revert literally every edit it makes as per WP:DENY, as the vandal's edits can not be trusted due to a combination of poor writing, eagerness to insert original research nonsense, and general incompetence.--Mr Fink (talk) 04:05, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Sibirotitan

Hello! Your submission of Sibirotitan at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Chris857 (talk) 04:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signature causing problems at DYK

Lusotitan, I figured out what part of your signature was causing problems at DYK - the pipe character "|" between talk and contribs. Templates use the pipe to separate template arguments. You could change the pipe character to something else, or wrap it in nowiki tags like so: <nowiki>|</nowiki>. And your nomination is good to go. Chris857 (talk) 15:15, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up, I put in the nowiki tags. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 15:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sibirotitan

On 20 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sibirotitan, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the newly named dinosaur Sibirotitan is only the second sauropod species named from the country of Russia, and one of the oldest titanosauriform sauropod species known from all of Asia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sibirotitan. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sibirotitan), 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.

— Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 14:32, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That section

The Tarbosaurus section was fine not bad there some research on the piece.

New popular culture for Tarbosaurs

A Tarbosaurus was the main character in Speckles: The Tarbosaurus (The Dino King).^[1] Tarbosaurus also appears in the BBC documentaries Chased by Dinosaur were it fights with Therizinosaurus and The Truth About Killer Dinosaurs where it was seen hunting an Ankylosaurus.^[2] Tarbosaurus is seen in the imax Documentary Dinosaurs Alive where it fights Tarchia.^[3] Tarbosaurus is in Mongolian Post it stamps.^[4] Tarbosaurus appears in books toys. Tarbosaurus appeared in the game Dinosaur King^[5].

1. "IMDB Dinosaur King".
2. "BBC Nature Tarbosaurus".
3. "Dinosaurs Alive IMDB".
4. "Paleophilatelie.EDU".
5. "wikidata Dinosaur King WIKI".

Can i please add this one instead. Tarbosaurus Appearance in media is pretty prevalent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bubblesorg (talk • contribs) at 04:36, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good you keep track

This Alex guy is just adding stuff without referencing to Hyperodapedon‎, with spelling mistakes, he just doesn't seem to care. Good you do. Cheers, Tisquesusa (talk) 05:00, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaur articles as part of Wikiproject Paleontology

Hi Lusotitan, I have seen you have removed the wikiproject Paleontology banner from Neovenator talk page, however pretty much every dinosaur article has both a dual wikiproject dinosaurs and paleontology on the talk page (Baryonyx is the only one I can find that only has wikiproject dinosaurs for whatever reason), I find it a bit bizarre to just remove it from the neovenator article, given that the vast majority of articles have both. Thus I have reverted your decision for the meantime. If dinosaurs are going have their wikiproject paleontology banners removed, and thus be excised from the scope of wikiproject paleontology this is quite a huge change and is going have to be discussed on the wikiproject paleontology talk page. Kind regards Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:39, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's already a guideline over on the WikiProject page, after being discussed previously. The practice just never got properly implemented. Quoting the WikiProject page:

"Since there is already a dedicated palaeontology project, only dinosaur articles that are important to the subject of paleontology in general should be tagged by that project, since all dinosaur articles are already paleontology articles by default."

Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 22:06, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a direct link the quote and discussion? How does one define "important to the subject of paleontology in general"? That's really vague, does that only apply to taxa important to the development of paleontology in general, like Megalosaurus and Iguanodon? Iconic taxa like Tyrannosaurus and Triceratops?. Or important 'transitional' fossils like Archaeopteryx and Microraptor?. If this is going to be done, "important to the subject of paleontology in general" needs to be specifically defined by community consensus on the wikiproject paleontology talk page, the vagueness of the criteria is probably why it wasn't done previously. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the link to the quote, but that is on the wikiproject dinosaur page, whether or not a page is part of wikiproject paleontology should only ultimately be the result of wikiproject paleontology guidelines, what the wikiproject dinosaur page says is pretty much irrelevant to that. If wikiproject paleontology links are going to be removed from dinosaur articles this needs to be discussed with wikiproject paleontology members on their project talk page Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's how we treat other things. Everyone agrees putting the "Dinosaurs" category on Neovenator would be excessive, since there's already a carcharodontosaurids category we put it in. That automatically also categorizes it as a dinosaur, since all carcharodontosaurids are dinosaurs. Likewise, every article in WikiProject Dinosaurs falls under paleontology since WikiProject Dinosaurs is within WikiProject Paleontology. If we need to ask WikiProject Paleontology whether we can have them excluded, why not ask WikiProject Geology? That's the exact same thing, we've just moved it up a layer.

Regarding the discussion, it seems the discussion on it on the WikiProject Dinosaurs talkpage wasn't archived properly, I can only find it by looking at the editing history.Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 22:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't answered my question. What does "important to the subject of paleontology in general" mean in your opinion? you've just made it out like that wikiproject paleontology should be removed from all dinosaur articles, which is not what the original quote implied. The wikiprojects =/= categories, and having another wikiproject in the talk page does not significantly clutter it. like adding neovenator directly to the dinosaur category would. incidentally the category "dinosaurs" from my brief look at it seems like a wastebasket anyway, and it's subcategory list of dinosaur genera, and dinosaurs by continent are an absolute mess with bizzarely small list of dinosaur taxa and a smaller subcategory of monotypic dinosaur genera despite virtually all dinosaur genera being monotypic. anyways wikiproject dinosaurs is not within wikiproject paleontology, if it was it would be a taskforce. Wikiproject paleontology in turn is not part of wikiproject geology. they are all in fact sister projects. It just seems weird to do it to just Neovenator, when there is nothing about Neovenator in particular that warrants it being removed from wikiproject paleontology over hundreds of other dinosaur articles. If you are going to do this you'd need to be consistent and remove it from hundreds of other dinosaur articles which should not be done unilaterally, but instead discussed with other users on the wikiproject paleontology talkpage, paging FunkMonk for discussion. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't singling out Neovenator. I happened to be on its talk page and decided to enforce the rule. I do a similar thing with updating the portal link templates at the bottom of every dinosaur page; instead of taking the huge timesink to do it to every page at once, systematically, just do it when I happen to be editing anyways. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 00:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant back during the dfiscussion and in the guideline is that dinosaur articles are already inherently palaeontology articles. So a dinosaur article doens't need to be tagged with the palaeo project if it isn't somehow important to palaentology in genera. Megalosaurus is important to the history of palaeontology, whereas say, Mojoceratops, isn't really. But there are of course borderline cases. FunkMonk (talk) 22:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

on your next edit

On your next edit. Please in your edit summary ask sutt to come to the discussion page so we can ask him a couple of question. I did read our response and i did look at richard sutt. Signs of a very underpriced wikipedia. SHould we offer him up some help?????? Also please ask them to make a user and talk page.

This is my talk page (User talk: Richard.sutt)Richard.sutt (talk) 20:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pachyrhinosaurus

I just wanted to ask why it's unncessary to add both parents. Pachyrostra is lower than Pachyrhinosaurini would'nt that be important to indicate? (User talk: Richard.sutt))Richard.sutt (talk) 20:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As long as Pachyrostra is displayed readers can click on the link to see that groups parents. It also saves the taxonboxes from taking up an unreasonable amount of vertical space. IJReid ^{{{T - C - D - R}}} 14:35, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Permission to add Pachyrostra to the Ceratopsidae template

May I? (User talk: Richard.sutt)

Logged out

Hi. Was this you? The vote has a user-like signature, but it was not made with an account. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This was not me. It seems the IP just copied the signature code from a nearby comment, which happened to be mine. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 15:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok. I've messaged the anon in question. Thanks, Manifestation (talk) 18:28, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speciesbox and monotypic genera

Replying here to not further derail the discussion at WP:TOL. I'm not sure what you're seeing with Saurophaganax. Are you viewing it in mobile mode? For me, in non-mobile view, the genus, species, and binomial lines are bold and not clickable, and putting the cursor on them does nothing. In mobile mode, the genus is not bolded, and it kind of acts like a link; while I can't click on it, when I put the cursor on it, it gets underlined like links do. Is that what you're talking about? Plantdrew (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not in mobile mode but that it what it's displaying on my end. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 18:41, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, apparently it's a browser thing. It displays bold in Chrome but not Firefox. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 18:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. I'm using Firefox 61. It is getting underlined when you put the cursor on it? There does seem to be some sort of problem with self-links in mobile mode (so far I've only tested with going to the mobile page on a desktop computer with Firefox). I'm finding that any self-link (not just in taxoboxes) is not bold and gets underlined when the cursor is placed on it in mobile mode. Of course, there really aren't very many self-links on Wikipedia; taxoboxes for monotypic taxa are one of the few places they show up. Plantdrew (talk) 18:51, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they underline when hovered over but don't actually work. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 18:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems to be a bug in how the page is rendered. I've brought it up at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Self-links not bolded in certain viewing configurations. Plantdrew (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Irritator

Thanks for your recent edits[1] to the Irritator article! I'd noticed a few of those issues before, but was a bit reluctant/unsure of how to fix them. Also yeah, I have GA and FA plans for this article in light of the Museu Nacional fire. FunkMonk is doing the same with Thalassodromeus, which hails from the same formation as Irritator, you might remember from our discussion at the WikiProject Palaeontology page[2]. There's still a lot of work left to do though if it's going to be comprehensive enough for FA, I just got my hands on the Angaturama paper so its description will be filled in pretty soon. And of course there's the postcranial specimens as well, which Machado and Kellner have described in various papers. ▼PσlєοGєєкƧɊƲΔƦΣƉ▼ 22:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Ledumahadi

On 4 November 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ledumahadi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during its time 200 million years ago, Ledumahadi's weight of 12 tonnes (26,000 lb) made it the largest animal to have lived on Earth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ledumahadi. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ledumahadi), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Lusotitan. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tyrannosaurus

Hi, are you still going to shorten the feeding section? LittleJerry (talk) 22:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will at some point. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 00:08, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Take part in a survey

Hi Lusotitan

We're working to measure the value of Wikipedia in economic terms. We want to ask you some questions about how you value being able to edit Wikipedia.

Our survey should take about 10-15 minutes of your time. We hope that you will enjoy it and find the questions interesting. All answers will be kept strictly confidential and will be anonymized before the aggregate results are published. Regretfully, we can only accept responses from people who live in the US due to restrictions in our grant-based funding.

As a reward for your participation, we will randomly pick 1 out of every 5 participants and give them $25 worth of goods of their choice from the Wikipedia store (e.g. Wikipedia themed t-shirts). Note that we can only reward you if you are based in the US.

Click here to access the survey: https://mit.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eXJcEhLKioNHuJv

Thanks

Avi

Researcher, MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy--Avi gan (talk) 02:13, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deinonychosauria

Hi, I didn't link Deinonychosauria in Xixiasaurus before because it is now a redirect to Dromaeosauridae. But thinking about this, making it a redirect was probably not sound in the first place, since the term still seems to be used by some researchers. Furthermore, I don't even think Dromaeosauridae would be the right place to redirect it... Should it maybe be restored? FunkMonk (talk) 03:23, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it still redirects to a subsection on the topic, but yes, it feels out of place there. Makes more sense to direct it to the relationships section of Paraves or give it a short page explaining the model and its validity. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 03:43, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Gobiraptor) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Gobiraptor.

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

Nice work; thanks for creating this!

Do note that it's generally a good idea to have more than one source on any page; in this case, I've added a reference to the Wiener Zeitung and expanded the article a tiny bit using that source. Also, you shouldn't rate articles you create as FA on the quality scale; this status is reserved for featured articles that have gone through a thorough review.

Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers and happy editing!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|SkyGazer 512}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

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

SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 01:07, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SkyGazer 512: Oops, copied over WikiProject code and forgot to change the rating. Regarding the second source, news article sources are generally highly discouraged in WP:DINO due to the poor quality of science journalism (as appears to be the case... they never suggest it ate crustaceans in the paper itself, which the article is entirely based on). Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 01:10, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response! Regarding the rating, that's completely understandable; mistakes happen. :) I apologize for not realizing that about the news articles sources; it certainly is something I should have thought of. Feel absolutely free to revert my edit if you'd like.--SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 01:12, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Weewarrasaurus

On 12 February 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Weewarrasaurus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first discovered fossil of the dinosaur Weewarrasaurus was noted for being preserved in green-blue opal? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Weewarrasaurus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Weewarrasaurus), 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.

– Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Map size

I made it equal with the taxobox on my screen resolution and size, but apparently that varies quite a bit. Would be nice to automate that, but I don't know how that would work. Tisquesusa (talk) 17:26, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious genera

The automated taxobox system doesn't support dubious genera with names written with ".."; for example it can't at present abbreviate "Tanius" to "T." So I think a manual taxobox is best at "Tanius" laiyangensis. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:47, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: there is another way of handling questionable generic assignments, by using ? rather than ".." – see Tortrix? destructus. This method is supported by the automated taxobox system. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:58, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Inapplicable, as there is no doubt that the species doesn't belong to Tanius. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 22:20, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Bajadasaurus

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About Galleonosaurus

Hi Lusotitan,
I am puzzled why you removed references from BBC News and ABC News (Australia) from that article in this edit. They are without doubt reliable sources.
Given that this species and its genus was only recently described, it would appear to me that this might be a DYK candidate, with those references to support it.
Please let me know if I can assist you in any way about improving the English language Wikipedia.
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Press releases are not reliable at all when it comes to palaeontology, anything that doesn't butcher the ideas of the given paper is a rare surprise. They should be avoided unless there is some information about the discovery or history that the literature is unable to provide. When the article can be sourced only with peer reviewed papers written by experts and not repurposes of that exact same source written by someone with no idea what they're talking about, that's ideal, and it's the case here. Now, both this articles look pretty fine, there's no grave errors; but there's no information that can't be gleaned from the far more reliable source of the paper which the articles are merely re-statements of to begin with. There's no need for them. If you want to argue pointless news sources should be used in dinosaur articles against years of precedence, go argue it at the talk for WP:DINO. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 15:57, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit on Tanis (fossil site)

I reverted this addition - sorry.

The reason is, that this is an article on the site. It is not a biographical article on its discoverer, any more than the article on Chicxulub is an article on its discoverer and all that's said about him in the media. There's a lot to write, and this is not really stuff that belongs.

The other problem is that the New Yorker is a single source. It has a somewhat dramatic approach which may mean its coverage isn't exactly balanced - but we don't have good other sources for significant views on the matters you added, which they have claimed, to compare with. And if we did, we'd put them in a BLP, not here - and then only if he himself becomes notable which is not yet clear. Last, as it has a negative tone, the concerns about poorly sourced negative BLPs are relevant.

For all these reasons, I've removed the text, which is virtually a rehash of the New Yorker's description. It may be that we will have an article on him. But it won't be this one.

When he becomes notable, and we have other good sources, you might want to create it :) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 02:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel this is not important than his whole section should be removed, it's for the most part even less important. The Museum described is directly relevant and this reflects on his reputation as a palaeontologist, which is rather important. Also, I included a second source, ScienceMag, which featured a quote not present in the New Yorker article, so it's not just coming from them (something I know already since I've heard of controversy surrounding him before, but that's irrelevant). Also, why the image removal? It's relevant to the adjacent text and there's nothing else to put there. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 02:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter

April 2019—Issue 001

Tree of Life

Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Tree of Life newsletter!

WikiCup heating up

Tree of Life editors are making a respectable showing in this year's WikiCup, with three regular editors advancing to the third round. Overall winner from 2016, Casliber, topped the scoreboard in points for round 2, getting a nice bonus for bringing Black mamba to FA. Enwebb continues to favor things remotely related to bats, bringing Stellaluna to GA. Plants editor Guettarda also advanced to round 3 with several plant-related DYKs.

Wikipedia page views track animal migrations, flowers blooming

A March 2019 paper in PLOS Biology found that Wikipedia page views vary seasonally for species. With a dataset of 31,751 articles about species, the authors found that roughly a quarter of all articles had significant seasonal variations in page views on at least one language version of Wikipedia. They examined 245 language versions. Page views also peaked with cultural events, such as views of the Great white shark article during Shark Week or Turkey during Thanksgiving.

Seasonal variation in page views among nine bird species

Did you know ... that Tree of Life editors bring content to the front page nearly every day?

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the removal of taxa

Hey um, I do not want to come off as rude, but. Why exactly are you reverting my edits on adding in ornithopod genera? Some of them are indeed valid. OviraptorFan (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid or dubious taxa don't get put in taxoboxes. I'm not aware of taking away any valid ones. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 19:38, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

May 2019—Issue 002

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Fundamental changes being discussed at WikiProject Biology

On 23 May, user Prometheus720 created a talk page post, "Revamp of Wikiproject Biology--Who is In?". In the days since, WP:BIOL has been bustling with activity, with over a dozen editors weighing in on this discussion, as well as several others that have subsequently spawned. An undercurrent of thought is that WP:BIOL has too many subprojects, preventing editors from easily interacting and stopping a "critical mass" of collaboration and engagement. Many mergers and consolidations of subprojects have been tentatively listed, with a consolidation of WikiProjects Genetics + Molecular and Cell Biology + Computational Biology + Biophysics currently in discussion. Other ideas being aired include updating old participants lists, redesigning project pages to make them more user-friendly, and clearly identifying long- and short-term goals.

Editor Spotlight: These editors want you to write about dinosaurs

Editors FunkMonk and Jens Lallensack had a very fruitful month, collaborating to bring two dinosaur articles to GA and then nominating them both for FA. They graciously decided to answer some questions for the first ToL Editor Spotlight, giving insight to their successful collaborations, explaining why you should collaborate with them, and also sharing some tidbits about their lives off-Wikipedia.

1) Enwebb: How long have you two been collaborating on articles?

• Jens Lallensack: I started in the German Wikipedia in 2005 but switched to the English Wikipedia because of its very active dinosaur project. My first major collaboration with FunkMonk was on Heterodontosaurus in 2015.
• FunkMonk: Yeah, we had interacted already on talk pages and through reviewing each other's articles, and at some point I was thinking of expanding Heterodontosaurus, and realised Jens had already written the German Wikipedia version, so it seemed natural to work together on the English one. Our latest collaboration was Spinophorosaurus, where by another coincidence, I had wanted to work on that article for the WP:Four Award, and it turned out that Jens had a German book about the expedition that found the dinosaur, which I wouldn't have been able to utilise with my meagre German skills. Between those, we also worked on Brachiosaurus, a wider Dinosaur Project collaboration between several editors.

2) Enwebb: Why dinosaurs?

• JL: Because of the huge public interest in them. But dinosaurs are also highly interesting from a scientific point of view: key evolutionary innovations emerged within this group, such as warm-bloodedness, gigantism, and flight. Dinosaur research is, together with the study of fossil human remains, the most active field in paleontology. New scientific techniques and approaches tend to get developed within this field. Dinosaur research became increasingly interdisciplinary, and now does not only rely on various fields of biology and geology, but also on chemistry and physics, among others. Dinosaurs are therefore ideal to convey scientific methodology to the general public.
• FM: As outlined above, dinosaurs have been described as a "gateway to science"; if you learn about dinosaurs, you will most likely also learn about a lot of scientific fields you would not necessarily be exposed to otherwise. On a more personal level, having grown up with and being influenced by various dinosaur media, it feels pretty cool to help spread knowledge about these animals, closest we can get to keeping them alive.

3) Enwebb: Why should other editors join you in writing articles related to paleontology? Are you looking to attract new editors, or draw in experienced editors from other areas of Wikipedia?

• JL: Because we are a small but active and helpful community. Our Dinosaur collaboration, one of the very few active open collaborations in Wikipedia, makes high-level writing on important articles easier and more fun. Our collaboration is especially open to editors without prior experience in high-level writing. But we do not only write articles: several WikiProject Dinosaur participants are artists who do a great job illustrating the articles, and maintain an extensive and very active image review system. In fact, a number of later authors started with contributing images.
• FM: Anyone who is interested in palaeontology is welcome to try writing articles, and we would be more than willing to help. I find that the more people that work on articles simultaneously with me, the more motivation I get to write myself. I am also one of those editors who started out contributing dinosaur illustrations and making minor edits, and only began writing after some years. But when I got to it, it wasn't as intimidating as I had feared, and I've learned a lot in the process. For example anatomy; if you know dinosaur anatomy, you have a very good framework for understanding the anatomy of other tetrapod animals, including humans.

4) Enwebb: Between the two of you, you have over 300 GA reviews. FunkMonk, you have over 250 of those. What keeps you coming back to review more articles?

• FM: One of the main reasons I review GANs is to learn more about subjects that seem interesting (or which I would perhaps not come across otherwise). There are of course also more practical reasons, such as helping an article on its way towards FAC, to reduce the GAN backlog, and to "pay back" when I have a nomination up myself. It feels like a win-win situation where I can be entertained by interesting info, while also helping other editors get their nominations in shape, and we'll end up with an article that hopefully serves to educate a lot of people (the greater good).
• JL: Because I enjoy reading Wikipedia articles and like to learn new things. In addition, reviews give me the opportunity to have direct contact with the authors, and help them to make their articles even better. This is quite rewarding for me personally. But I also review because I consider our GA and FA system to be of fundamental importance for Wikipedia. When I started editing Wikipedia (the German version), the article promotion reviews motivated me and improved my writing skills a lot. Submitting an article for review requires one to get serious and take additional steps to bring the article to the best quality possible. GAs and FAs are also a good starting point for readers, and may motivate them to become authors themselves.

5) Enwebb: What are your editing preferences? Any scripts or gadgets you find invaluable?

• FM: One script that everyone should know about is the duplink highlight tool. It will show duplinks within the intro and body of a given article separately, and it seems a lot of people still don't know about it, though they are happy when introduced to it. I really liked the citationbot too (since citation consistency is a boring chore to me), but it seems to be blocked at the moment due to some technical issues.
• JL: I often review using the Wikipedia Beta app on my smartphone, as it allows me to read without needing to sit in front of the PC. For writing, I find the reference management software Zotero invaluable, as it generates citation templates automatically, saving a lot of time.
  • Editor's note: I downloaded Zotero and tried it for the first time and think it is a very useful tool. More here.

6) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-wiki?

• FM: Perhaps that I have no background in natural history/science, but work with animation and games. But fascination with and knowledge of nature and animals is actually very helpful when designing and animating characters and creatures, so it isn't that far off, and I can actually use some of the things I learn while writing here for my work (when I wrote the Dromaeosauroides article, it was partially to learn more about the animal for a design-school project).
• JL: That I am actually doing research on dinosaurs. Though I avoid writing about topics I publish research on, my Wikipedia work helps me to keep a good general overview over the field, and quite regularly I can use what I learned while writing for Wikipedia for my research.

Get in touch with these editors regarding collaboration at WikiProject Dinosaurs!

Marine life continues to dominate ToL DYKs

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

June 2019—Issue 003

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Spineless editors overwhelmed by stubs

Within the Tree of Life and its many subprojects, there is an abundance of stubs. Welcome to Wikipedia, what's new, right? However, based on all wikiprojects listed (just over two thousand), the Tree of Life project is worse off in average article quality than most. Based on the concept of relative WikiWork (the average number of "steps" needed to have a project consisting of all featured articles (FAs), where stub status → FA consists of six steps), only seven projects within the ToL have an average rating of "start class" or better. Many projects, particularly those involving invertebrates, hover at an average article quality slightly better than a stub. With relative WikiWorks of 5.98 each, WikiProject Lepidoptera and WikiProject Beetles have the highest relative WikiWork of any project. Given that invertebrates are incredibly speciose, it may not surprise you that many articles about them are lower quality. WikiProject Beetles, for example, has over 20 times more articles than WikiProject Cats. Wikipedia will always be incomplete, so we should take our relatively low WikiWork as motivation to write more articles that are also better in quality.

Editor Spotlight: Showing love to misfit taxa

We're joined for this month's Editor Spotlight by NessieVL, a long-time contributor who lists themselves as a member of WikiProject Fungus, WikiProject Algae, and WikiProject Cephalopods.

1) Enwebb: How did you come to edit articles about organisms and taxonomic groups?

• Nessie: The main force, then and now, driving me to create or edit articles is thinking "Why isn't there an article on that on Wikipedia?" Either I'll read about some rarely-sighted creature in the deep sea or find something new on iNaturalist and want to learn more. First stop (surprise!) is Wikipedia, and many times there is just a stub or no page at all. Sometimes I just add the source that got me to the article, not sometimes I go deep and try to get everything from the library or online journals and put it all in an article. The nice thing about taxa is the strong precedent that all accepted extant taxa are notable, so one does not need to really worry about doing a ton of research and having the page get removed. I was super worried about this as a new editor: I still really dislike conflict so if I can avoid it I do. Anyway, the most important part is stitching an article in to the rest of Wikipedia: Linking all the jargon, taxonomers, pollinators, etc., adding categories, and putting in the correct WikiProjects. Recently I have been doing more of the stitching-in stuff with extant articles. The last deep-dive article I made was Karuka at the end of last year, which is a bit of a break for me. I guess it's easier to do all the other stuff on my tablet while watching TV.

2) Enwebb: Many editors in the ToL are highly specialized on a group of taxa. A look at your recently created articles includes much diversity, though, with viruses, bacteria, algae, and cnidarians all represented—are there any commonalities for the articles you work on? Would you say you're particularly interested in certain groups?

• Nessie: I was a nerd from a time when that would get you beat up, so I like odd things and underdogs. I also avoid butting heads, so not only do I find siphonophores and seaweeds fascinating I don't have to worry about stepping on anyone's toes. I go down rabbitholes where I start writing an article like Mastocarpus papillatus because I found some growing on some rocks, then in my research I see it is parasitized by Pythium porphyrae, which has no article, and how can that be for an oomycete that oddly lives in the ocean and also attacks my tasty nori. So then I wrote that article and that got me blowing off the dust on other Oomycota articles, encouraged by the pull of propagating automatic taxoboxes. Once you've done the taxonomy template for the genus, well then you might as well do all the species now that the template is taken care of for them too. and so on until I get sucked in somewhere else. I think it's good to advocate for some of these 'oddball' taxa as it makes it easier for editors to expand their range from say plants to the pathogenic microorganisms of their favorite plant.

My favorite clades though, It's hard to pick for a dilettante like me. I like working on virus taxonomy, but I can't think of a specific virus species that I am awed by. Maybe Tulip breaking virus for teaching us economics or Variola virus for having so many smallpox deities, one of which was popularly sung about by Desi Arnaz and then inspired the name of a cartoon character who was then misremembered and then turned into a nickname for Howard Stern's producer Gary Dell'Abate. Sorry, really had to share that chain, but for a species that's not a staple food it probably has the most deities. But anyway, for having the most species that wow me, I love a good fungus or algae, but that often is led by my stomach. Also why I seem to research so many plant articles. You can't eat siphonophores, at least I don't, but they are fascinating with their federalist colonies of zooids. Bats are all amazing, but the task force seems to have done so much I feel the oomycetes and slime moulds need more love. Same thing with dinosaurs (I'm team Therizinosaurus though). But honestly, every species has that one moment in the research where you just go, wow, that's so interesting. For instance, I loved discovering that the picture-winged fly (Delphinia picta) has a mating dance that involves blowing bubbles. Now I keep expecting them to show me when they land on my arm, but no such luck yet.

3) Enwebb: I noticed that many of your recent edits utilize the script Rater, which aids in quickly reassessing the quality and importance of an article. Why is it important to update talk page assessments of articles? I also noticed that the quality rating you assign often aligns with ORES, a script that uses machine-learning to predict article quality. Coincidence?

• Nessie: I initially started focusing on WikiProject talk page templates because they seem to be the key to data collecting and maintenance for articles, much more so than categories. This is where you note of an article needs an image, or audio, or a range map. It's how the cleanup listing bot sorts articles, and how Plantdrew does his automated taxobox usage stats. The latter inspired me to look for articles on organisms that are not assigned to any ToL WikiProjects which initially was in the thousands. I got it down to zero with just copypasta so you can imagine I was excited when I saw the rater tool. Back then I rated everything stub/low because it was faster: I couldn't check every article for the items on the B-class checklists. Plus each project has their own nuances to rating scales and I thought the editors in the individual projects would take it from there. I also thought all species were important, so how can I choose a favorite? Now it is much easier with the rater tool and the apparent consensus with Abductive's method of rating by the pageviews (0-9 views/day is low, 10-99 is med, 100-999 is high...). For the quality I generally go by the ORES rating, you caught me. It sometimes is thrown off by a long list of species or something, but it's generally good for stub to C: above that needs formal investigation and procedures I am still learning about. It seems that in the ToL projects we don't focus so much on getting articles to GA/FA so it's been harder to pick up. It was a little culture shock when I went on the Discord server and it seemed everyone was obsessed with getting articles up in quality. I think ToL is focusing on all the missing taxa and (re)organizing it all, which when you already have articles on every anime series or whatever you can focus on bulking the articles up more. In any event, on my growing to-do list is trying to get an article up to FA or GA and learn the process that way so I can better do the quality ratings and not just kick the can down the road.

4) Enwebb: What, if anything, can ToL and its subprojects do to better support collaboration and coordination among editors? How can we improve?

• Nessie: I mentioned earlier that the projects are the main way maintenance is done. And it is good that we have a bunch of subprojects that let those tasks get broken up into manageable pieces. Frankly I'm amazed anything gets done with WikiProject Plants with how huge its scope is. Yet this not only parcels out the work but the discussion as well. A few editors like Peter coxhead and Plantdrew keep an eye on many of the subprojects and spread the word, but it's still easy for newer editors to get a little lost. There should be balance between the lumping and splitting. The newsletter helps by crossing over all the WikiProjects, and if the discord channel picked up that would help too. Possibly the big Enwiki talk page changes will help as well.

5) Enwebb: What would surprise the ToL community to learn about your life off-Wikipedia?

• Nessie: I'm not sure anything would be surprising. I focus on nature offline too, foraging for mushrooms or wild plants and trying to avoid ticks and mosquitos. I have started going magnet fishing lately, more to help clean up the environment than in the hopes of finding anything valuable. But it would be fun to find a weapon and help solve a cold case or something.

June DYKs

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

July 2019—Issue 004

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you delete every major edit I do?

Is pretty understandable if my edits were bandalism, I was only trying to expand stubs, thats what the page says, This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.Honestly it feels like only extended users can do edits, while new users can not, even if you have valid sources.--PaleoNeolitic (talk) 02:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of this and how can we get the page reviewed?

Draft:Adratiklit

Atlantis536 (talk) 06:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

August 2019—Issue 005

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 15:43, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

September 2019—Issue 006

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 22:26, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

October 2019—Issue 007

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:34, 3 November 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.166.123 (talk) 13:19, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A link to the report is at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Lusotitan reported by User:85.241.166.123 (Result: ). Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 13:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

November 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

November 2019—Issue 008

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

December 2019 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

December 2019—Issue 009

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Ornithomimosauria

A tag has been placed on Template:Ornithomimosauria requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:08, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

January 2020—Issue 010

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

February 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

February 2020—Issue 011

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

March 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

March 2020—Issue 012

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

April 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

April 2020—Issue 013

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

May 2020—Issue 014

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Enwebb (talk) 19:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"for heaven's sake"

Can't you be a bit nicer, I didn't enjoy it. There is absolutely no consensus that E. kuukpikensis is a valid subspecies of Edmontosaurus (I didn't see any paper doing this, in fact); rather, it is referred to E. sp. in the latest study. Thus my revert. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 05:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was talked about on the talk page and the rename was considered the best choice of compromise. In light of the rename it must as such be linked at Edmontosaurus. Perhaps it can be labelled as dubious in the taxobox. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 05:45, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The combination Edmontosaurus kuukpikensis does not exist at all (no hits in a google scholar search). This is not a compromise, this is inventing a new combination, and is absolutely against WP:OR. Please revert again to the previous version of the article. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 05:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ugrunaaluk is not considered a valid taxon distinct from Edmontosaurus in the modern literature. It is unacceptable for it to be left to exist in its original state. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 07:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I never suggested to keep that article. Ugrunaaluk should redirect to Edmontosaurus, and Edmontosaurus kuukpikensis, as a made-up name, has to be deleted altogether (no redirect, per WP:OR). Content needs to be merged with Edmontosaurus. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 07:17, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

E. kuukpikensis is probably useful to have as a redirect seeing as the name is often used online. Folks might try searching it. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 13:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, should be fine to keep it as a redirect. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to discuss this at either the page of the WikiProject before doing such. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 19:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FunkMonk already filed a merge proposal. My personal concern was with the Edmontosaurus article, which is now resolved as well. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June/July 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

June and July 2020—Issue 015

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Delivered on behalf of Enwebb (talk) 16:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

August 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

September 2021—Issue 016

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Delivered on behalf of Enwebb (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

January 2021

Hello, I'm William Harris. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Dire wolf, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. William Harris (talk) 03:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adelolophus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Adelolophus 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Adelolophus

The article Adelolophus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Adelolophus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Re: Stegouros

Do you have any preference as to which figures from the preprint you want uploaded? Like, do you want all of the extended data figures? Do you want the bonemap fig from the supplementary information pdf? Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:33, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, completely forgot to respond on that point, sorry. Both figures from the supplemental data could be potentially useful (in addition to the two others from the main paper I can personally upload through Researchgate). LittleLazyLass (Talk | Contributions) 01:36, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone and uploaded all of them, even the researchgate ones, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lusotitan/Category:Stegouros. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also some photos of Antarctopelta material in there that is probably worth incorporating into that article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:59, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Parankylosauria

On 15 December 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Parankylosauria, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that species in the dinosaur group Parankylosauria have tail weaponry termed a "macuahuitl", in reference to the Mesoamerican weapons of the same name? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Parankylosauria. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Parankylosauria), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 018

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

February 2022—Issue 018

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life/Newsletter/019

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

March 2022—Issue 019

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 020

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

April 2022—Issue 020

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See talk about Catalonia

The map with Europe is unnecessary and creates very obvious double standards generating a potential violation of WP:Neutrality. I have created a Talk explaining the reasons, feel free to read it or give your opinion about it there.

Thanks. Venezia Friulano (talk) 11:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mentioned in arbitration enforcement request

Hi there. I just wanted to give you a courtesy notification that I mentioned you by name in an arbitration enforcement request I've just lodged against Roxy the dog. The thread can be found here. I'd have used a template for this, but I don't think there is one. Sideswipe9th (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Xing et al. (2022) Amurosaurus study

I noticed they added Lambeosaurus clavinitialis in their phylogenetic analysis. Do you think they did it because you added it to its species list on Wikipedia? If so, congratulations on changing science! 49.144.194.246 (talk) 02:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Moore et al. 2023 M.sinocanadorum paper

Hey, it would seem like you have a copy of the new M.sinocanadorum paper? If you do, is it possible to have a copy, please? I need to update some of my images. Cheers. Steveoc 86 (talk) 15:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 21

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

August 2023—Issue 021

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 22

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

September 2023—Issue 022

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 23

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

October 2023—Issue 023

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

-MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 24

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

November 2023—Issue 024

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 25

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

December 2023—Issue 025

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 26

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

January and February 2024—Issue 026

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 27

Shortcut

• WP:TOLN

March and April 2024—Issue 027

Tree of Life

Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Editor experience invitation

Hi LittleLazyLass :) I'm looking for experienced editors to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 21:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Also, plese have a look also at the information at this page, which appears when editing J. K. Rowling. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Laquintasaura

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Laquintasaura 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 02:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Laquintasaura

The article Laquintasaura you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Laquintasaura for comments about the article, and Talk:Laquintasaura/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Motokare Retry

Thank you for reviewing Motokare Retry for Did you know?. I'm currently trying to create more articles on shōjo manga series, so look forward to them! lullabying (talk) 03:01, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Asiatyrannus

Hello! Your submission of Asiatyrannus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Z1720 (talk) 00:26, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your nomination has been marked for closure due to a lack of response. If you wish to save it before it closes, please comment there immediately. Best of luck! BlueMoonset (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Laquintasaura

On 22 August 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Laquintasaura, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the discovery of Laquintasaura challenged the idea that early dinosaurs could not survive in equatorial regions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Laquintasaura. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Laquintasaura), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Asiatyrannus

On 3 September 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Asiatyrannus, which you recently nominated. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Asiatyrannus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Asiatyrannus), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

BorgQueen (talk) 03:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]