User Talk:UtherSRG
zOMG
![]() |
zOMG | |
I, Hojimachong, hereby award UtherSRG A completely gratuitous zOMG barnstar, for being 110% awesome. Plus 1. --Hojimachong |
WikiProject Mammals Notice Board
![]() |
Happy holidays!
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3a/Christmas_tree_sxc_hu.jpg/70px-Christmas_tree_sxc_hu.jpg)
— mw (talk) (contribs) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Padshah UtherSRG 2024
You wrote "Since you can't explain in your own words, I see no reason to unblock you"
What own words? What do mean?
- What questions should I answer You just decline the unblock request.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Homo sapiens History (talk • contribs)
Koala
Why have you reversed my edit. It was not vandalism; it was a good faith edit. It was also accurate. I put my reasons onto the talk page five days ago and nobody has addressed them. So much for discussion. Apparently, the rule is ignore alternative points of view and then just cut them out of the discussion anyway.
The current opening to the article is a laughingstock. "Koala Bear" ia an inaccurate and old name for koalas, certainly never used by anybody who knows anything about the subject. Corythaeola (talk) 14:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have just read the page Wikipedia:Vandalism. My edit did not meet any of the requirements for vandalism outlined in that article. How can you justify your actions? Corythaeola (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've noticed you are interested in Primate taxonomy. You might want to work on the blue monkey page as it is missing the golden and silver monkeys as subspecies, although their pages have them as subspecies.
- You might also like to mention the taxonomy used. It's not a big deal for me (although it does affect my life list) however the Ugandans certainly believe they have three species. I am not touching it as every single edit I have made since joining has been reverted. I think I will just go back to being anonymous. Corythaeola (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- As you started a discussion on talk:Koala, but did not get a consensus, then made an edit request, which I closed asking that you get consensus first, and then made that edit, yes, it was vandalism. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:04, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- If nobody ever engages in a conversation, consensus can never be established. Normally if nobody replies that is taken as no objections.
- Please point out exactly which section of the Wikipedia vandalism page is relevant here. Corythaeola (talk) 22:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Anything disruptive is vandalism. Being told "no" in multiple ways, then doing it anyway, is disruptive. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- I apologize for "shouting". However, I have not been told "no" multiple ways. I posted on the talk page, outlining my views and clearly stating my intentions. Nobody replied to my post till last night. I then saw the semi-protect edit option, which I tried but you refused. If you consider that a no to editing the page you were not exactly clear. Everything I have read indicated that it was appropriate to edit the page, including as I read it "being bold".
- Anyway, I have already been punished for this. Every edit I have made on this site has been reversed by one of your colleagues. They took no more than three minutes to reverse 37 edits over three different pages. Clearly gave it a lot of consideration.
- Given the way I have been treated, I don't know if I want to bother doing any more editing. When I get back from the conference I am at, I will draw up a submission for your "mammals" page and see how it goes. Corythaeola (talk) 11:18, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Anything disruptive is vandalism. Being told "no" in multiple ways, then doing it anyway, is disruptive. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Question from Ths 2024 (07:16, 7 August 2024)
Hi there! I'm trying to write a page: Draft:The Harbour School But users say that the articles aren't notable enough. Could you help provide some clarity?
I was told not to link back to the school site as its a primary source but I see a lot of other international schools cite themselves.. --Ths 2024 (talk) 07:16, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Horsejump5!: Please read our notability for organizations policy. While yes, you can use primary sources to cite individual facts in the article, you can't use primary sources for establishing notability. please read WP:SIRS for what's required in a reference to determine notability. Finally, you should read WP:BACKWARDS to propel you forwards. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:44, 7 August 2024 (UTC) Oh, I see you renamed.... - UtherSRG (talk) 11:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Poblicia fuliginosa
Hi. Only two of those taxonbar links are genuine, and both are badly outdated, and the GBIF link is contradictory. You'll note that (1) all of the records in iNat for this taxon are under Poblicia, not Crepusia. (2) the primary authority file for world auchenorrhynchs places it in Poblicia here (3) the two most authoritative sites for North America, BugGuide and the UDel site (here} also both place it in Poblicia. I'd be grateful if you could undo that move and place this species back where it belongs. Thanks. Dyanega (talk) 14:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. But my comment on not making the comment in the article but to start a discussion on its talk page is still valid. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Gotcha. I'll keep that in mind, thanks. Dyanega (talk) 15:27, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Premature Adminship
You said to remind you when the ban discussion was done. The discussion and the author are done.
McClenon mobile (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:25, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Crystel Moore
Hey, there. This is a long-term abuser. I think they should be indeffed and their talk page access revoked. Frost 11:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Roger that. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Thank You
BloxyColaSweet (talk) 12:21, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Clouded leopard
Hey. I hope you are not mad at me for reverting additions by the anonymous user for the 2nd time. I did so, because the text at ADW is rather outdated with references to Beacham and Beltz, 1998; "Clouded Leopard, Neofelis nebulosa", 1996; Sunquist and Sunquist, 2002; "About the Clouded Leopard", 2008
, i.e. to years, when Sunda and Mainland clouded leopards were still considered as a single species. BhagyaMani (talk) 12:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @BhagyaMani: No worries, my friend. Want me to use some admin powers on this? Protect the article? - UtherSRG (talk) 13:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Well, if this anonymous user tries again to add this rubbish, then I think a page protection would be nice. Cheers, BhagyaMani (talk) 13:13, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Removal of Describers
I would really appreciate it if you did not delete describers from the pages that I am creating.
Thanks Phil Fish (talk) 17:01, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you mean the red categories you had on Cnesterodon pirai? Red categories are strictly disallowed. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Humanzee illustration
But the fully scientific illustration is impossible by definition, while this example is based on a work by a professional bio-illustrator? Strecosaurus (talk) 19:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- There are plenty of images of life recreations (a technical term for art of non-living species) that don't place them unduly into a human setting. The art is fantastic, but I mean that in both in assessing the technical merits of the work and in the unrealism of the human setting. - UtherSRG (talk) 23:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- What difference does the background make, as long as it's neutral? (And even regular chimps are sometimes dressed like that for ads and stock images - I've even seen dogs "doing science" - what do you mean by unrealistic background?) Strecosaurus (talk) 00:48, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- So frankly I'm very confused as to why this image should be deleted (plus again it's as scientific as there ever will be short of an actual photo of a humanzee). Strecosaurus (talk) 00:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
African Wild Dog Conservancy
Hey. I saw that you reverted my edits on African Wild Dog Conservancy, which now again redirects to African wild dog. I understand the reasoning and apologise for not pronouncing my reasonign behind my edit. Background: "African Wild Dog Conservancy" is the registered name both of an NGO based in the United States, and of a gazetted conservation area in Namibia. While I can't say much on the US NGO (the available information on their current level of activity is a little sketchy), I do see relevance for a stand-alone article on the Namibian conservation area. In Namibia, African Wild Dog Conservancy is the legal name of a geographically demarcated conservation area of 3824 km2, inhabitated by approximately 5 000 people. Although it carries the name "African Wild Dog" the purpose of the conservation area is broader and not specifically targeted ad Wild Dogs. A simple redirect to African wild dog will not do it justice. I therefore do suggest that African Wild Dog Conservancy is turned into a page about the Namibian conservation area, while for the US NGO a referenced mention on African wild dog is sufficient. Calidumpluviam (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- You should take this to WP:DRV. Read the instructions there before making a request. I'm not the admin you need to ask, but the admin who deleted it via the AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)