Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:40, 30 November 2006

Botany]] 19:11, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial (this is really great for getting used to editing Misplaced Pages)
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Also, don't worry too much about being perfect.

It might be a good idea to read this to see how you can avoid making common mistakes, though.

neutral point of view Misplaced Pages:Questions, Place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Formats for tables

(section 4/5) Help:Table --Lethaniol

Response to your message

In response to your message in my Talk page: Afghanistan's current regions were entirely part of Khorasan. Khorasan was not a Political department with its own government, but rather a name for a Geographical region. Khorasan was for some periods under the reign of Persian empires, and for some periods it had its own independant dynasties and empires. In the main article of Greater Khorasan, I have mentioned all the main Afghan regions to be part of Khorasan, which is of course true: Greater Khorasan was formed of several provinces: Hari (Herat, Nishapur and Tus), Seestan, Bactria (Balkh and northern regions of Afghanistan), Transoxiana (Merv, Samarqand, Bukhara and Tajikistan), Stagidya or Ghazna (central regions of Afghanistan) and Kabulistan. Khorasan's boundaries have varied greatly during ages. The term was loosely applied to all territories of Persia that lied east and north east of "Kavir-e-namak" and therefore were subjected to change as the size of empire changed. Afghanistan's current regions form the largest parts of Greater Khorasan. I had also written that Afghanistan was known as Khorasan before the 18th century, but I had problem with some Iranian users. They insisted that this point should be used in Afghanistan's article and not in Khorasan. And in Afghanistan's article, Nisarkand is trying to push his Pashtun POVs. Thank you Ariana310 06:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Kingdoms notes

Does Misplaced Pages subscribe to the 5 kingdom or 6 kingdom scheme, also? Isn't 6 the current?

The Eukaryote page groups green plants, Rhodophyta and Glaucophyta as Archaeplastida. Many of the protists on Misplaced Pages include references to a Cavalier-Smith article, and he generally calls Rhodophyta and Glaucophyta plants. Another major reference in Misplaced Pages articles doesn't use a hierarchical classification scheme, but does group green plants, Glaucophytes and Rhodophyta together under the same name, Archaeplastida.

The protist classification scheme is more the "typical classification," as most classifications done today emphasize the difference between monophyletic clades and nonmonophyletic grades, strictly moving away from classification schemes that require any of the latter.

APG II is solid enough that most researchers in the botanical sciences are using it as the reference point for peer-reviewed publications at least for American, British, French, Polish, Japanese, and Australian publications, and most Canadian that I see. I have to hedge a bit here, as botany is not strictly my field, although it's where I'm researching right now, so maybe Curtis has some more insight into this, and also the type of stuff I research is skewed towards using phylogenies from a handful of researchers who are the main contributers to APG I and II, or paleobotanists who are at institutions where major APG II players are.

I'm willing to do it anyway, but it would be nice to have some stable guidelines on Misplaced Pages in the ToL section for what writers are to do. It may wind up being messy, but wouldn't it be easier to start writing stuff with a more solid representation of the current science on classifying organisms than redo everything soon? KP Botany 20:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What is space

There are 9 regular namespaces; each of these has a corresponding talk namespace. Some pages are outside of these namespaces, too: Special pages, like Special:Contributions/KP Botany/Archive 1. These are generated by the engine and can't be edited directly. There are a total of 20 namespaces.

Each namespace has a more or less specific technical and social purpose.

• Articlespace is for encyclopedic articles. Whatever you put here is subject to review.
• Userspace is subdivided into pseudo-namespaces, one for each editor (e.g, User:YourNameHere/Sandbox). You are generally allowed to do what you like within your own space. Cautions apply.
• Imagespace is where you go after you upload an image; also, where you go if you click an existing image. It contains information on the image itself.
• Categoryspace consists of pages which index or list other pages, often including image pages. You can edit category pages to add notes but the usual way to add a page to a category is to add a link to the category to the page itself.
• Templatespace is for bits and pieces that are used in several places in the project. For example, see Template:Tilde. Almost anything can be put in a template but some people get angry at this or that. Templates can be very complicated.
• Helpspace is supposed to contain information useful to editors: how to use this tool. However, it has been hijacked by Meta and cannot usefully be edited. You can find much valuable information there but it's not easy to navigate. Give it a try.
• Projectspace or wikipediaspace is for almost everything else. You will find policies, proposals, real help pages, metaphysical essays, and "kitchens".
• Talkspace is really 9 different namespaces. There is a talk page for every other page on the project (although it may not yet have been created). I think of this as the "back side" of the page. Talkspace is for talking. Sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. It's generally considered rude to edit anybody else's comment, although we often reformat each other for clarity.

There are a couple other namespaces but I don't want to overwhelm you. Most arguments over where a given page should be put boil down to articlespace, projectspace, templatespace, or userspace. Moving a page from another namespace into userspace is called userfying.

|What is transclusion? |To use the contents of a template, you insert markup into the destination page that looks like this: {{tilde}}. When the page is rendered by the engine, the double braces tell it to transclude or copy the template contents into the rendered page. Any page can be transcluded but templatespace is specifically intended for the purpose.

|What happens when a page is moved? |When a userbox, or any template, or any page at all is moved from one name or namespace to another, the engine automatically creates a redirect from the old to the new. So, everything is fine. Sometimes editors then go around deleting the redirects, which is usually stupid but not always. Sometimes bots fix this; sometimes they don't.

|What are Misplaced Pages userpages? |No such thing. Beware; anybody can edit -- and everyone does.

What you are still probably trying to figure out is why anybody would start a war over where a UBX is stored. Well, I don't really think there is any good reason; such people are confusing the cereal with the box it comes in. If you ask them, they will give you a lot of reasons but none of them have convinced me. I think it's a lot of makework and a controversy stirred up to distract us from more important issues.

John Reid

Manuel de Guirior

Hi KP. Those were different expeditions. Mutis's did not begin until 1783, three years after Guirior had left office. There were three royal expeditions to the New World at about that time, those of Hipólito Ruiz López in Peru (including New Granada), Mutis (as far as I know only in New Granada, not in Peru proper), and Martín Sessé y Lacasta in New Spain. And thanks for starting the Ruiz López article. I had intended to translate his article from the Spanish Misplaced Pages, but haven't gotten to it yet. --Rbraunwa 16:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

If you do any translations let me know, and I'll add whatever information I have. I want all the Spanish botanists and expeditions on en.wiki. I did download it, but didn't use it for this brief start. However, I did check the dates in my notes, and, oh, I see Mutis started under Antonio Caballero y Góngora. Thanks for checking. I'll revert if you haven't. KP Botany 16:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the Hipólito Ruiz López image and details. I can't believe how fascinating his journals are, he comments about everything, and I have started adding comments from his journals to relevant articles. KP Botany 20:23, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Great job on adding to the article. Thank, in particular, for adding the list of genera as links, so I can individually work on some of these from his journals. Did you get this from IPNI? I did download an IPNI list and will check it and add to yours if necessary. KP Botany 20:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

High Sierra

There is a page called High Sierras, it is supposed to be about the alpine zone of the California Sierra Nevada, but should be called the High Sierra instead, however there is already a page called High Sierra. So, exactly how do I go about this? Do I have to make a disambiguation page first? Apparently it's a computer term, also. The WP:Disambiguation page doesn't quite, that I can see, say how to make a disambiguation page, but rather when to, and what to include on one.

KP Botany 19:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm moving the film article to High Sierra (film), and creating a disambiguation page that will link to all three. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

We're talking of merging High Sierra (biome) into Ecology of the Sierra Nevada. Any thoughts? -Will Beback · † · 19:00, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Go for it. -Will Beback · † · 19:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Re:Afghanistan Articles

Salaam KP Botany! Thanks for your encouragement. I really appreciate it. NisarKand does posses much intelligence about Afganistan related articles and Pashtun people. From working on the Pashtun article, I've noticed that NisarKand's edits are constructive, though sometimes contentious. Like you in the Afghanistan discussion, I buttressed a few of his arguments on the Pashtun talk page as they were correct, sourced, and inclusive. I've noticed the edit warring on the Afghanistan article for a long time now. I do hope it dies down but making an article reflect a neutral point of view can be a cumbersome task. Thanks again for your post on my talk page. It was very uplifting. If I can be of service to you in the future, please feel free to contact me. Khuda hafiz, Anupam 06:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hotlist of Plants/FlowersAA (section)

I think the addition of Latin names and families to common names on this list is an excelent idea. --Ricardo Carneiro Pires 19:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Ak Koyunlu

Thanks, but I know why we use talk pages. I just get lazy sometimes. :-) Cheers, Khoikhoi 23:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

KP, I really don't need people lecturing me on how to compromise. I am able to see both sides of the argument, as I often mediate on many pages. I wasn't even really edit warring, I just made one revert, which I already provied an explanation for at User talk:Karcha#Ottoman Turkish. I really think you should be telling this to other users. Khoikhoi 00:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I understand your concerns, but I already do that. Not always, as you have proven, but for the most part I usually discuss changes on the talk page. Khoikhoi 00:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Botany, etc vandalism

Yeah, it can be tedious! I'll semi-protect them - MPF 16:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Want to waste a few hours days wasting time laughing?? - take a look here: WP:BJAODN :-) MPF 16:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Botany and Protist sprotected; Embryophyte didn't seem too bad so I didn't bother with that - MPF

Discussion award

Just to say, even though i have suggested the award, i feel i may not be the best judge. Simply south 21:56, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm just wondering, is there a programme for designing Barnstars? (which i have note used, I used Paint and Publisher) Simply south 22:07, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, i'll try. Simply south 22:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Cream and blue?

Simply south 22:26, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I would hate for this to descend into some sort of back slapping fest but I'd like to thank you for your thoughtful approach regarding my 'hasty' recent edit, and subsequent comment on the Douglas-fir discussion page. This whole Misplaced Pages thing would benefit enormously if more editors took your view. I've learnt a lot today.The Boy that time forgot 22:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD proposal

Hey there,

Just a note to say that I've responded to your opposition at Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for deletion, and thought I should draw your attention to it. Thanks! :)

Cheers, Daveydweeb (/_review!) 22:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, no problem at all. Daveydweeb (/_review!) 23:01, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Medcab

Do you think I can close the case? Geo. 16:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstars

You know, I don't think Evrik has ever gotten over his Scouting Barnstar being demoted to a project award. I have never seen him support any nominated Barnstar. Some people become depressing in their predictability. Jeffpw 22:36, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Mwai Kibaki

It's time to start requesting this user be blocked. KP Botany 17:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I suspect you'e right. I'll give a final warning on the user's talk page and if it happens again then report it to WP:AIV. --Cherry blossom tree 22:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

RE: Incivility

I don't have the motivation to go and sort this out at the moment. Could you bring it up on WP:ANI instead? Apologies, Steel 23:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Your comments

Thank you for your comments and feedback. I will certainly take them in mind for future contributions. I would like to remind you that I started the discussion in a very formal way. Since User:Pashtun tried to mess up the discussion by ignoring my points & questions and by attacking personally on me, I hope you at least read his answers and noticed it, I felt free to write serious statements. And what he wrote to me was more insulting, you have to consider the both sides.

He wrote: if your mom and dad told you fairy tales when you were a child, about Afghanistan once being called Khorasan, then I can understand that..... I suggest you stop before you make a fool out of yourself and everyone starts laughing.

I can understand that each user/editor should be more patient and ready to welcome other editors' view points, and try not to reflect his own opinions. The best contribution would in a mutual understanding. And that's what I always try my best for. But some users do rely on their ethnicity e.g. User:Pashtun towards anything related to Khorasan or Ariana, or User:Tajik anything which opposes the Persian or Iranian case.

Thank you Ariana310 00:10, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Monocots

As the article's discussion page shows I've thought all along that Monocots was a redundant article and should be merged. At the very least, it should have a merge tag added. I'm taking a break from Misplaced Pages and won't be doing any more editing for a while. MrDarwin 18:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Man!

I definitely needed an American in that subpage of mine! Your comment rendered me a-phon-os! See my long reply to Francis for a different approach on this apparent complexity... NikoSilver 23:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Think so? Just wait 5' for my response! :-) (please don't quit now, I need a month to explain this to someone new!) NikoSilver 00:39, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

High Sierra (biome) move?

Where was the discussion? I didn't see any strong "keep" consensus at either Talk:High Sierra (biome) or Talk:Ecology of the Sierra Nevada. The few comments I saw were all about moving it. I was following the general strategy of WP:BOLD.

In any event, can I suggest expanding Ecology of the Sierra Nevada with your new material? I don't believe that "High Sierra" is an common name for the biome: I haven't seen it used in any literature I've seen. The highest area is known as the "alpine" or "Hudsonian" zone. There is a "Montane Forest" zone, which in the Sierra is specifically either the "Lodgepole-Red Fir Forest" (Upper Montane Forest) or the "Jeffrey Pine Forest" (Lower Montane Forest).

Looking forward to your new material! hike395 04:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I also want to draw your attention to Sierra Nevada (US), which is the overview article about the Sierra. Any general material belongs there, while specific ecological material can go to Ecology of the Sierra Nevada. hike395 04:48, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Later: I think I understand what is going on: you discussed it with Will Beback, but not on either of the Talk pages of the merge. In any event, the right answer is to contribute the material somewhere, it will get incorporated the right way. Don't feel obligated to produce an entire wonderful article by yourself: this is a collaborative effort, after all.

If you want to just start writing the article, you can make a branch off your own user page (e.g., User:KP Botany/Alpine zone of the Sierra Nevada), and we can always move it somewhere else later. Again, just feel free to dive in and start writing.

Also: if you feel like it, you can also contribute to (a currently very skimpy section) on alpine tundra around the globe: Tundra#Alpine tundra.

hike395 05:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Here, 567,000 articles on research in the "High Sierra." It would have been a courtesy to discuss it on the talk page of the article you planned to move, before you moved it. And, yes, I know I can basically do whatever I want, including unilaterally recreate the page you removed, but I dislike being sabotaged on Misplaced Pages by other editors who don't simply discuss things--before they do them--on the article's discussion page. That's what it's for.

But, whatever, I'll just do whatever I want.KP Botany 15:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not disputing that the term "High Sierra" exists. I've used it myself. But, it's not a common name for the biome, it refers to a geographical region. Do you see what I mean? If you want to write an ecological or botanical article, it seems that we should use the most common name for the biome.

But please note, I'm not sabotaging you in any way --- you can add material to any number of articles on the alpine zone of the Sierra Nevada, or you can create a new article. In fact, I'm hoping that you do! But, note again that there was no anti-move discussion on the Talk pages for several days.

Remember to assume good faith --- I'm just trying to help. Thanks! hike395 03:57, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, it sounds like you're pretty upset. I'm sorry if my page move upset you. I'm looking forward to collaborating with you on Sierra-related articles in the future. Thanks! hike395 04:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for help

Someone put a welcome on my talk page when I first got here, and once, somewhere, I saw that listed as tag or template, but I can't find that anywhere. What is the shortcut code for it? KP Botany 17:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Hello! You'll find what you're looking for at Misplaced Pages:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace#Welcoming_new_users. Sandstein 17:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: Spirogyra

I know; that's why I didn't call it vandalism. =) Powers 21:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

No trouble. =) Thanks for your message. Powers 00:21, 30 November 2006 (UTC)