User talk:Pollinator
|
|
Hi Pollinator--
Wanted to write you and ask if you can back up with solid references the changes you made to the page about Columbia; specifically, who was responsible for it being burned. There is little question that Sherman caused it to happen. Even being generous, he allowed his drunken soldiers to riot. I cite the following:
First, Sherman’s official report on the burning placed the blame on Lt. Gen, Wade Hampton III, who Sherman said had ordered the burning of cotton in the streets. Sherman later recanted this allegation and admitted lying in his Memoirs, Volume 11 page 287. He said, “In my official report of this conflagration I distinctly charged it to General Wade Hampton, and confess I did so pointedly to shake the faith of his people in him, for he was in my opinion a braggart and professed to be the special champion of South Carolina.”
Secondly, in 1867 a chance meeting of former combatants occurred in Federal Governor Orr’s office in Columbia. Gen. Howard, commander of the US 15th Corps of Sherman’s army during the burning, was to be introduced to Gen. Hampton in the presence of many dignitaries. Gen. Hampton said, “Before I take your hand General Howard, tell me who burnt Columbia?” Gen. Howard replied, “It is useless to deny that our troops burnt Columbia, for I saw them in the act.” (See Edwin J. Scott, Random Recollections of a Long Life. page 185; The Burning of Columbia, Charleston, SC, 1888, page 11.)
Look, the war's over. There were eyewitness accounts of who did it and how it happened. Unfortunately those accounts conflict, and modern writers have a veritable buffet of reports they can choose from to support their pet positions. It's become a battle over PC (I'm not accusing you of that, just stating the obvious) these days. Now, I'm not a historian but I have read extensively on the subject. Sherman burned Columbia. If you can provide citations and references that he did not then I will freely admit I'm wrong. Yes, the war's over, but if the historical truth is bad or good in light of today's political sensibilities, it's still the truth.
Keep on wiki-ing. Have a good one. :)
Hi Dave: Thanks so much for your kind words. I have only been doing Wiki articles for about six months and a large part of that was on an article on my hometown, Rochester. I have recently done articles on The Phelps and Gorham Purchase, The Holland Land Company, The Morris Reserve and The Mill Yard Tract. I also have contributed a bit to The Holland Purchase piece. Yesterday and today I spent several hours prefecting a map of western New York showing those tracts. (It took me that long because I had to learn parts of the image-editing software that I had never used...and a lot of trial and error...mostly error.) I took the map that you added to the The Holland Purchase article and added the boundries of the various first-order land subdivisions that occurred in the 1790s. I also added a few more cities and corrected the location of Rochester, which was a bit too close to Lake Ontario(city hall is about 12 miles inland). I also added a pic of a very old map of the Holland Purchase to that article. Since you like maps perhaps you will find these maps of interest. User:Bill 1745 11:59, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hello. Wikipedia articles should not begin with dictionary-style definitions, but with complete sentences. Accordingly, I have redirected your "pollinizer" article. Michael Hardy 23:09, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Hi Pollinator, cool image there on compound eye! Could you please make a note where this is from and its legal status (like "I took this", "public domain" or something) here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dragonfly_eye_3811.jpg)? Thanks, Magnus Manske 11:30, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thank you. Yes I took it, and all other photos I've posted here. Pollinator 11:56, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Hello Pollinator, please to meet you :)
I left you a note at Talk:Pollinator decline. Thank you. Anthère
Hello Pollinator;
Would it be possible that you participate in helping me to translate the article I partly wrote about ecology ? There is currently a paragraph I think is correct in the page (hidden). I am asking because I want this article to be "proper english". Do not feel like you should do, it is perfectly ok to me if you do not want or do not have the time. In case you could, I would be very pleased.
Have a good day in any case :-)
I'll be glad to give it a try....Pollinator 21:03, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)
great :-). Well Brian nicely took care of this paragraph (it may need some terminology fix, but I do not feel the courage this evening and will be away this week end, perhaps can you check ?). I am working on the next paragraphs :-), perhaps for next week. I am sure you could improve the whole stuff anyway. Thanks :-) ant
Hello Pollinator. If you feel like bringing any kind of help to ecology (see hidden in edit mode), you will be more than welcome.
Have a good day :-) ant
Hello again
are you still around ?
If so, could you restore your edit at gaucho (insecticide) ?
The content of the article when deleted is at User:Anthere/temp. Please, pick the content back and just put it again in the article.
Thanks
ant
here is the explanation of my doing so, as I left on Dr Clay... (who moved the content of the page) user page to explain why I deleted the page
from user page
I deleted the article Gaucho (pesticide) to restore the authorship of the article, per gfdl license.
why did I do so you would ask ?
I did not care much about authors, until, about a week ago, I was told I had illegally recreated an article, without mentionning the name of the original author while I did. I was told I was infringing the license, which required to trace the authors of an article. Actually, this point is still being discussed on the legal mailing list; but fact is, I am very insistent on fairness, and if some say I am doing illegal action in not respecting other people authorship, I will insist that my authorship is respected as well :-)
One thing that is recommended in case a whole portion of an article is moved to another, is either to mention the main authors of that portion in the comment box, or more easily, to mention the name of the original article from which the text was moved.
end of comment to another user
Cheers Pollinator :-)
No, it did not mess anyone else edit. I was watching (quite worried, I am glad you came back quickly). No one did any other edit than restoring the link to the other Gaucho :-) ant
Thanks for telling me. I've reverted it now, but it would have been fine for you to have reverted it yourself. If you see a user is continuing to vandalise a page, you can list them on Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress so a sysop can consider banning them. By the way, Special:Emailuser/Pollinator seems to have your wrong address in. Angela. 01:15, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hi, Sorry, I don't have time to look at it right now, but if it meets the guidelines at [1] (http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Selected_Articles_on_the_Main_Page), then list it the bottom of [2] (http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Selected_Articles_on_the_Main_Page) and maybe someone else will have a look and add it. There aren't too many guidelines for recent deaths, other than the article must include this fact, and be listed on Recent deaths. By the way, replying to the e-mail you sent via the "email this user" form still doesn't work. It might be best if you left messages on my talk page, rather than e-mail. I tend to check that more often anyway. Angela. 06:55, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello Pollinator :-)
Basically the translation of ecology is over. If you bring corrections, be they of content, style, typos, whatever, you will be welcome. I will fix missing or bad links, and replace the top with bee references (much better), and that will be it. I also put the ecology article on the main page (and it seems no one objects). Cheers. Ant
I am sorry you did started the translation, as it was done by another as well :-(
Do you like that ? http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology#Usage_of_the_term
- Yes, of course. I was pleasantly surprised. Pollinator 00:31, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I think that is a great example :-))))
| Contents |
Beekeeping
I was just checking you were paying attention. ;) Sorry about that, I'm going through a list of 500 articles on Simple (http://simple.wikipedia.org) that need to be linked and beekeeping was the one right after beard, so I must have copied and pasted and the wrong thing. I should probably get a bot to do it, but I don't really like them. Thanks for spotting the mistake. I've fixed it now. Angela. 19:38, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hello Dave. I hope you had nice holidays, and wish you a happy new year (in France, it is the habit to do so till the 31rst of january, so I am actually not late :-)) ant
Hi. I really like the following picture: image:Anolemeal6127.JPG. Did you take it? Have you got a larger/higher resolution version? --snoyes 07:19, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you. Yes I do. Pollinator 07:25, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Hehe, that was a bit of a request ;-) What do you think about uploading a larger/higher resolution version of all your images (User:Pollinator/Images)? There are some really nice images there, and I'd love to see wikipedia have them in more detail. If you want, you could send them to me and I'll do all the resizing, etc. --snoyes 07:35, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Hehe, I suspected as much. I guess I may as well come clean. I make a part of my living with my photos. So I'm not comfortable with giving away large images. I gotta buy groceries sometimes. I've been giving 300 pixel images here, but that's too small to be of much commercial value. If someone wants them for educational non-profit use, I'm usually pretty free with them, but they could theoretically be taken from here for commercial use. I might occasionally upload a larger one. The cumulonimbus cloud pic I put up today loses a lot at 300 px. and I was thinking of a larger one there. OK? Pollinator 07:50, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- I should have thought of that, considering the quality of the images (Image:Dragonfly eye 3811.jpg). Thanks for adding all the pictures you have. --snoyes 08:05, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Done - no hassle. --snoyes 06:32, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Ailanthus webworm
replies on the Talk:Ailanthus webworm page seglea 07:35, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Could you clarify the copyright status of images
Hi Pollinator,
Could you please clarify the copyright status of Image:Misumena_vatia_8430.JPG? i.e. whether you took it, or got permission to redistribute here under the GFDL. It would be best if you could put the source on this page as soon immediately after you upload it? It saves questions like this later. Cheers. --Lexor 05:25, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- All images I upload, unless otherwise noted, are mine, as noted above. Pollinator 05:47, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- that is what comes from being able to take pictures which are too pretty ;-). Cheers Pollinator. Ant
- That's great that they're your own, but please put that information in the summary line when you everytime you upload it, to save the double-check. It's not enough to put it on your talk page, it should be on the page dedicated to that picture, otherwise it's too easy for the information to be lost. All you need to say is something like: Image of Miseumena vatia (taken by Pollinator released under GFDL. Having in the same place as the image metadata is like making sure that each file in a computer program has the copyright notice, if you just have it at in one file in the program, it's too easy for the copyright status to get confused. Witness the SCO v. IBM case. ;-) Ideally the wikipedia software would have a checkbox that you could just check for "image taken by me, released under GFDL", or taken from http://blahblah with permission. --Lexor 13:27, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)
JohnWoolsey's blast
I can't believe that someone who can figure out how to use a computer is trying to argue for Creationism. Luckily, most of the fools who are dumb enough to swallow the idea that scientists are trying to foist their "viewpoint" on people against their "viewpoint" that "Satan planted fossils to trick us", that the earth was created in 4004 BC and other nonsense, are too dumb to figure out how to use a computer as well, and are unable to memetically spread their fanatical commitment to ignorance. It's unfortunate you are around in the 21st century, I think you would have been happier several centuries back when Galileo Galilei was persecuted as a heretic for saying the earth revolved around the sun, that Jupiter had moons and so forth, and Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for the same reason. I think we of the 21st century would be happier to have you back there in your natural milieu. It's amazing how creationists can have the cognitive dissonance to argue that human life can only be created through direct divine intervention on the one hand, and on the other hand have laws passed in the US against human cloning of humans. Please stick to rants on abortion and Jesus, and stop bothering the rest of the world with your inability to grasp reality. -- JohnWoolsey 04:12, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
- Aren't you making a lot of assumptions (since I haven't identified my own position)? Anyway, I thank you for your viewpoint. You've made a strong point in the Creationists' favor - that Darwinism can be an intolerant religion.Pollinator 03:26, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- It appears that JonGwynne has some of JohnWoosley's leanings. At least the corrections that you had to make were not very extensive. Thanks for the work. Dan Watts 02:49, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Just a quick note that I deleted Lowergenesee2.jpg. - snoyes 14:54, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I like the picture of the cypress knees! - Marshman 02:19, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you! Pollinator 03:26, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pollinator... You mention on your user page that you are a Wesleyan. I have recently put up a page on Methodist local preachers (I'm one myself), but it is written very much from a UK perspective. I know that at one time the term was used in American Methodism but I don't see much current sign that they still do, either from the UMC websites or from living in Berkeley CA this year and talking to people at the church we attend. If you're able to fill in anything about American practice past or present, it would help the article - thanks. seglea 09:47, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Morning, Dave - I could well have disambiguated Andre Michaux incorrectly. I'm not particularly familiar with his work or visits. Would the correct link be the Americas or just North America? Thanks for your comment and you're right, I do get a bit zealous here. I've learned to trust, though, that someone will correct my disambiguation when I guess wrong. It's worked so far anyway. Rossami 13:58, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi. If you want to do a link to an image, but for it not to show up, do :image in [[ ]] eg [[:image:blah.jpg]] Secretlondon 22:39, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
Your photographs are absolutely amazing. I think they're some of the best pictures I've seen anywhere in Wikipedia. --No-One Jones 06:42, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pollinator. Thanks for your message, I am just back from holidays :-) I have plenty of nice pictures ;-) I will look at André Michaux later if you wish. I probably won't have things settled back to normal until at least 24 hours :-) fr0069 15:00, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)
hermaphrodite plants
It's probably worth checking with MPF, but I think hermaphrodite is fairly usual for plants (partly because it's a very common phenomenon) - in fact it may have a more specific meaning than it does in animals. Anyway I took the term from a USDA site, and I guess they would not be wrong in their terminology. By the way, did you see that he has turned live oak into a disambig. and renamed your tree Southern live oak? I did wonder whether that needed to be done - live oak is certainly used also as a generic term.
Great tree pictures, keep them coming!
Thanks for looking into the LPs in the States - I'll look forward to learning the answer.
seglea 16:47, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Jordan River
Nice addition to the Jordan River (disambiguation) page. -- Decumanus 21:38, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Magnolias
Hi Dave, thanks for the Magnolia virginiana pic! - MPF 18:39, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
M. liliiflora
Hi Dave, this species is actually a native of China (Sichuan, Yunnan), not Japan (though very long cultivated there); the Chinese name is Mulan, so might be best to call it Mulan magnolia? - MPF 19:18, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Fine with me. It's called Japanese around here, but that may be just local. I didn't do too much research on it, as my time is getting more scarce with good weather coming on. (Those magnolia photos were both taken today.) Do you want to move the page? Pollinator 00:13, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks; done, and added a few more odds'n'ends - MPF 02:17, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Bees
Mayan Stingless Bees
A Mayan friend of mine hooked me up with a freind of his who has several hives he is tending in the traditional way I will go tommrow and get you some pictures. Belizian 00:55, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)~
Got them not the best in the world I'll try to get you some better ones. They are on page 3 of the fauna section.
Did the stingless bee pics help? Any clarificaton or addtional picutres you need?
Belizian 19:51, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Sassafras
Why are the new sassafras pics labelled "Magnolia stellata"? WormRunner 18:25, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- No problem. I've done the same myself. WormRunner 00:54, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Resolution of photos
Hi Pollinator,
your photos are great - I love Image:Anolemeal6127.JPG - but most of them are fairly low-res. This is problematic especially as we are now thinking about a print edition of Wikipedia, where having high resolution photos is essential. Would you mind uploading them in a higher res? As you know, the software can scale them automatically on an article, so the higher the resolution of the original, the better.
If you have some computer knowledge, I have a Perl script to upload multiple images.—Eloquence 15:07, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)
- I understand. I wouldn't be too worried about commercial exploitation though - someone who does that would have to include a copy of the FDL, and copyleft the work that uses the picture.—Eloquence 23:42, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Another idea - would it be an option for you to limit the copyright terms on the high resolution versions? By default everything is protected for "life of the author + 70 years". This is obviously obscenely long - would you consider turning this into a fixed number of years (e.g. 10 years)? (I'd not recommend to say "after your death" to avoid giving people any ideas ;-)—Eloquence 03:42, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)
Hi. Is a Pollinator anything like a Governator? Welcome to Wikipedia, and please forgive my off-beat sense of humor! :-) --Uncle Ed 22:01, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Good luck
I saw the note you left on cleanup, and nominated you for adminship. Good luck, and I hope you accept--this place needs more good editors, and the more we can empower them, the better. Meelar 21:54, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Rio Cuarto craters
I haven't been able to track your "see also" Carolina Bay reference. Tell more! Wetman 18:47, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Both Carolinas and some of Georgia are pockmarked with craters, especially along the coast, called Carolina Bays. I have been meaning to do an article on them (and I will as soon as I can) but have been so busy, I only have time to check in for a few minutes at Wikipedia. Maybe I can do a stub right now, and add an image and some detail later. Pollinator 19:48, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Now my curiosity is piqued worse than before... Wetman 21:34, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
What you wrote means "11th of walk". I think the month is "marzo". -phma 11:44, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks. Pollinator 13:39, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Administrator
You are now one of the Wikipedia:Administrators. If you havn't already, please familiarize yourself with the articles linked at Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:54, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Good evening, Dave. I'm not sure that I agree with your characterization of the paper wasp family (Polistes) as "gentle". Certainly, the ones in my part of the country (NE Ohio) are more aggressive than either bumblebees or honeybees. Obviously, "gentle" is a value judgement and difficult to prove, but can you help to source or support that judgement? It seems to fly in the face of experience (no pun intended). Thanks. Rossami
s'pleasure; thanks --Tagishsimon
Thanks!
Thanks for your support for my nomination and kind words, Pollinator. Cheers, Cecropia 03:58, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hi, Dave. I came across your picture image:Tachinid 1695.jpg and wondered if you're sure about this identification? It looks much more like a Tephritid IMHO. --Keith Edkins 21:02, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- You can see the appearance of Tephritids at http://www.sel.barc.usda.gov/diptera/tephriti/PhotTour/Photos.htm - note especially the wing markings on Rhagoletis basiola which are very similar to the species you show. Tachinids are generally much more robust and hairy - see for instance http://www.bugpeople.org/cgi-bin/FamilyTachinidae.pl. I will change the reference in the Tachinidae article to something I'm sure about.
--Keith Edkins 06:55, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hmm, I feel stupid, I accidentally protected your page, sorry =\. But I was going to ask you a question -- how can you stand getting so close to large flies (such as a bald-faced hornet)? I yell and flee at the mere sight of even gentle insects, such as dragonflies and honeybees... oh, and the formatting of your picture of a Carolina Anole eating a dragonfly is sorta messed up at the Anole page... but I don't know how to fix it =\. ugen64 01:01, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
Cow Parsnip
Hi there Dave - I've sorted out the Cow Parsnip stub, though the taxonomy turned out to be a complete snakepit - pick a Latin name, any Latin name. But I had a nice photo of it so it was worth having a go. seglea 07:46, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Christianity in the Southern Hemisphere
Hi Dave! Thanks for signing my talk page. Yes, I am willing to do this - it make take me a week or so to get organized, but I am very interested in this topic and have delved into it quite a bit over the years. Give me a little time, and I'll attend to it:-) David Cannon 22:43, 12 May 2004 (UTC)
Colorado potato beetle
Hi Dave. Thanks for the addition of Image:Potato beetle 0482.JPG to Colorado potato beetle. On the image description page, could you please mention the source of the image and its legal status? A simple {{msg:GFDL}} would do wonders. Thanks! --Diberri | Talk 22:54, May 26, 2004 (UTC)
Hi Pollinator. Just wanted to tell you that 2 days ago my country banned the use of Gaucho for corn seeds treatment. In the south, in the past months, many beehives were stolen (about 250) because of the forthcoming shortage of honey. Friendly yours SweetLittleFluffyThing
Thanks Anthere. I mentioned this to the bee list. I understand there is some legal action going on in the US, in the form of a civil case against the manufacturer, but I don't know the details yet. Pollinator 03:41, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
Eh, thanks for your support Pollinator. I started improving the french article to update it. I'll come back to the english afterwards. SweetLittleFluffyThing
Image copyright tag missing
Hello, we're working hard to add image copyright tags to every image so that the copyright status is not ambiguous. I'd appreciate it if you could add the appropriate copyright tag to these images:
Please let me know if you have any questions about this.
Jeff 09:40, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)
again: Image copyright tag missing
Hello! I just wanted to ask wheter this image is copyrighted or not.
// Rogper 05:51, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Fixed. Thanks. Pollinator 13:20, Jun 6, 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Village pump
I have gotten no response from my latest question on Wikipedia:Village pump. What's the matter? --Marcus2
Image copyright status
Thanks for all the images you've added to the 'pedia. You've done some real great work! Could you please go back and specify the copyright status of each of those images (eg Image:Anolemeal6127.JPG)? A simple {{GFDL}} would do wonders :-) Thanks! --Diberri | Talk 21:09, Jun 16, 2004 (UTC)
Gay bathhouse
I've moved the discussion we were having on FAC/Archive to Talk:Gay bathhouse and added a new comment. When you get a chance, I'd be grateful if you could take a look at what I've written and opine on it, so that we can try to resolve this NPOV issue. Thanks, and thanks for contributing. :o) — OwenBlacker 10:16, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)
Hiya. I'm sure you didn't mean it, but your latest comments came across as quite agressive :-( I firmly believe that it is possible to disagree with someone without insulting them. I find the phrase "Unfortunately we seem to be entering an age when clear thinking is not valued" mildly insulting as it seems to be implying that I'm not thinking straight when I disagree with you.
Also I want to point out that I am not EB's buddy, nor am I Owen's, in fact I didn't know either of them until Danny listed Sam Spade on requests for arbitration.
Although I wouldn't go as far as saying Sam Spade was my buddy I certainly have a friendly relationship with him (as I do with Danny) I was concerncered that proper proceedure was not being followed, and I also objected to the AC ruling on content disputes. Despite the fact that I was being hostile to the listing of Sam Spade at RfA (actually it's probably because of it) OwenBlacker asked me to take a look at the GB article.
I understand that in a situation where you feel outnumbered, it can look like people are ganging up on you. But I assure you this is not true in my case. I consider myself pretty neutral in all this. I just want to improve the article. theresa knott 17:03, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Thank you for your support
Hi there! Just a short (and belated) THANK YOU for your vote in my favour in the vote to grant me sysop rights. It is a great privilege to be able to play a part in the development of what I consider to be a fantastic project. Your support was very much appreciated. David Cannon 09:34, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
License
HI, I think that Image:Lamium 8229.jpg is like your others photos under GFDL but could you confirm it ? We use it on french wp fr:Image:Lamium amplexicaule.jpg. Right now, we've assumed it is GFDL but hope it's true. Please let me a msg or modify the french page. Thanks in advance. Tipiac 10:26, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Image:Cypress 8001.JPG
In re: Image:Cypress 8001.JPG. I see above in Eloquence's comment that you don't want your images commercially exploited, but would you consider uploading a moderately larger version---say 600x600---of the Cypress image? I can tell that it's a really nice picture, but not much else. grendel|khan 21:02, 2004 Jul 13 (UTC)
Image sources
Image:Oil well3419.jpg has no source info--if I hadn't recognized it was you, I would have tagged it with Template:Unverified. Would you mind adding who took it and when (approximately) to all images you upload, and whether it's licensed under the GFDL? Thanks, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 21:04, 2004 Aug 7 (UTC)
At which Cato, NY, are the drumlins?
In the caption for Image:Drumlin4029.JPG, you say they're at Cato, NY. Which of the following would you think the better link to which to resolve that:
(they seem to be almost the same place, so maybe I'm just being pedantic). Thanks -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:24, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I would think the town. I'm not sure the village is even incorporated. But I don't know as it makes much difference. The drumlins are spread throughout the area, and, if I recall correctly, the village is partially on one itself. Pollinator 11:46, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)
Capitalization of "ice age"
I note you just moved the ice age article to Ice Age. I don't think that's correct and I'm raising the issue on talk: there, just so you know. Bryan 04:17, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Craters
Just for the record, I changed the link you posted to the Crater page from Greater Sudbury, Ontario (the city) to Sudbury Basin (the actual crater itself). While I grew up there, and do tend to think of the city and the crater as being indistinguishable from each other (what, me bitter?), it's technically more accurate to link to the crater article *grin* Bearcat 06:31, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Copyright tags
These images lack the copyright tags. Image:Dragonfly eye 3811.jpg, Image:Atteva punctella 8512.JPG, Image:Anolemeal6127.JPG, Image:Tachinid 1695.jpg, Image:Bombyliid 7294.jpg, Image:Syrphid.jpg, Image:Vespula 0078.JPG, Image:Snapper 2880.JPG, Image:Dairy4667.jpg, Image:Aedes 5627.jpg, Image:Foulbrood2test9994.jpg, Image:Smokies3517.jpg, Image:Fault4734.jpg, Image:Niagara3573.jpg, Image:Whirlwind9832.jpg, Image:Pumpkin pollination4365.jpg . You uploaded them, so you know more about them. Author? Which licence? -Hapsiainen 11:20, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
- Thank you for tagging them. Except that you left Image:Aedes 5627.jpg untagged for some reason. I have been searching for appropriate images to the animal image list, and I have found even more images uploaded by you, that have no copyright tags. Image:Sandhillshornet7893.JPG, Image:Scoliid 6103.JPG, Image:Velvet ant 9118.JPG, Image:Coelioxys7341.JPG, Image:Queencell 0017.JPG, Image:Chauliognathus sp 5823.JPG, Image:Bessbuglarva2654.jpg, Image:Bessbugadult2652.jpg, Image:Waspgatheringwood1813.JPG, Image:Polistes2650.JPG, Image:Anole 8172.JPG. I supppose that they were photographed by you and you released them under GFDL, but we can't be sure... -Hapsiainen 12:41, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
- I noted on my user page that all images are mine unless otherwise noted. There doesn't seem to be any image at Image:Aedes 5627.jpg, and I did not have time to figure out what was going on there. (Sadly, my time on Wikipedia is very limited lately.) I'll do the tags for the others when I have a little more time. Pollinator 02:02, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
- Image:Aedes 5627.jpg is an picture of a mosquito on human skin, I have no problems with viewing it. I've found more untagged images: Image:Opened queencell 0021.JPG, Image:Royal jelly 0030.JPG, Image:Queen-022f.jpg, Image:Twolined3668.JPG, Image:Anchorbug8479.JPG, Image:Spittlebug4383.JPG, Image:Mantis1.jpg, Image:Mantis2 6065.jpg. I am not going to search for them for a while, I think I've done enough. -Hapsiainen 20:47, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
- I already tagged them. You can remove a tag if it isn't correct. -Hapsiainen 20:09, Oct 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Image:Aedes 5627.jpg is an picture of a mosquito on human skin, I have no problems with viewing it. I've found more untagged images: Image:Opened queencell 0021.JPG, Image:Royal jelly 0030.JPG, Image:Queen-022f.jpg, Image:Twolined3668.JPG, Image:Anchorbug8479.JPG, Image:Spittlebug4383.JPG, Image:Mantis1.jpg, Image:Mantis2 6065.jpg. I am not going to search for them for a while, I think I've done enough. -Hapsiainen 20:47, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
- I noted on my user page that all images are mine unless otherwise noted. There doesn't seem to be any image at Image:Aedes 5627.jpg, and I did not have time to figure out what was going on there. (Sadly, my time on Wikipedia is very limited lately.) I'll do the tags for the others when I have a little more time. Pollinator 02:02, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
Fundamentalist and Evangelical Category
Hello Poll,
User:Gary D and myself had a big discussion about this issue. Please go to his talk page for my response to this. One Salient Oversight 02:55, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- All the pertinent material has now been moved to and collected at Category talk:Christian fundamentalism and evangelicalism --Gary D 04:04, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
Image:WNY5.PNG
Hi Pollinator. The information at Image:WNY5.PNG says that it is a conversion of a map by you - is that right?. It lacks an image tag - is it GFDL? Thanks -- sannse (talk) 18:38, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Pic request
Hi Dave, as you've offered to get pics before, could you get a tree or foliage pic for American Sweetgum to go with the others you already have there? One in full autumn colours would be good! (I can & will do individual leaves on my scanner, but not an overall tree or branch pic) - thanks, MPF 11:32, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks (and WOW!!) - MPF 22:03, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Image needing license
Hey there, could you please provide Image:Honeybee pollen basket 5233.jpg with an appropriate copyright tag. If you took the picture yourself, you can license it under the GFDL by adding {{GFDL}} to the image description page. Regards, [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 15:48, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)
Untagged images
There are a number of images that you have uploaded that have not yet been tagged. If you have a few minutes would it be possible to add tags to them? The untagged images are listed below for your convenience. - SimonP 06:26, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Image:Ambrosia 5977.jpg
- Image:Monarch 6650.JPG
- Image:Gulf Frit 5639.JPG
- Image:Bombus 6867.JPG
- Image:Joe Pye 5426.JPG
- Image:Olderbrood 0010.JPG
- Image:Luna antennae 2971.JPG
- Image:Nasinov 9024.JPG
- Image:Leafcutting 1 6431.JPG
- Image:Honeycomb 091f.jpg
- Image:Apiary 259F.JPG
- Image:Ditch litter 5622.jpg
- Image:Misumena vatia 8430.JPG
- Image:Cesareaphillipi2.jpg
- Image:Chrysalis5504.JPG
- Image:Rockstrata3435.JPG
- Image:Liriodendronflower0117.JPG
- Image:Phragmites6170.JPG
- Image:Kudzu4903.JPG
- Image:Cumulonimbus0713.JPG
- Image:Predator0653.JPG
- Image:Longtailskipper6632.JPG
- Image:Georgetownharbor6180.JPG
- Image:Slimed1552.JPG
- Image:Swarm0104.jpg
- Image:Irrigated blueberries4046.jpg
- Image:Lacewing3035.JPG
- Image:Georgetown6183.JPG
- Image:Maple7951.JPG
- Image:Varroa8536.JPG
- Image:Oil drilling3420.jpg
- Image:Erie Lock4083.jpg
- Image:Alderblossom.jpg
- Image:Grain elevator8089.JPG
- Image:Dogwoodice9669.JPG
- Image:Skipper5222.JPG
- Image:Tobacco blossom 1580.JPG
- Image:Sassafras9810.JPG
- Image:QALace2675.JPG
- Image:VulcanSteamLocomotive9347.JPG
- Image:Natcemetery9326.JPG
- Image:Coquina8095.JPG
- Image:Black widow ventral 1370.jpg
- Image:Black widow post dorsal 1370.jpg
- Image:Black widow ant dorsal 1370.jpg
- Image:Redtip9845.jpg
- Image:Mailpouch8466.jpg
- Image:Hancock cthouse8387.JPG
'nother piccy request
Hi Pollinator - any chance you could get pics of Redbay or Swampbay (to go at Persea) and Cherokee rose? - Thanks, MPF 22:31, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thanks for
catching "Niagara Falls" vndlsm.Sfahey 02:59, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)) (talk)[[]] 14:11, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
Barnstar
Hello Pollinator,
You may be an outmoded
- OK, will stipulate
fundamentalist
- plead not guilty, but do try to be accurate - a lot of people have little idea what one is...
homophobe
- plead not guilty as well..see above...
, but your photographic contributions to the Wikipedia are excellent and invaluable. Therefore I hereby award you this barnstar:
- thank you
Wear it with pride. And keep taking pictures.
(For that matter, I know you specialize in nature photography, but gay bathhouse could use an image. :-)
- I respectfully decline the assignment Pollinator 16:47, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Okay, didn't think you'd take it up, for all I know there may be a shortage of gay baths in SC, but good work all the same. American holly is a particularly timely addition to the 'pedia. NTK 02:13, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Rachelle Waterman
You just deleted the Rachelle Waterman article with the reason that it consisted of the words "Robbie Smells".
Other editors had reverted vandalism of this article in the past, rather than deleting the article entirely. I would expect someone with Administrator status to know to check the article history and revert before deletion.
I'm not sure what your motivation was here, but your actions were clearly anti-Wiki process, and also went against Wikipedia's policies.
If you are unsure, or disagree that your action was wrong:
Please see item #3, The "wiki process" as the final authority on article content (Excerpted from Foundation issues (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Foundation_issues)) for the reasons why this was anti-Wiki process.
Then, please see the Wikipedia article deletion policy for the reasons why your action was premature.
Finally, at a very basic level, you even failed to make mention of your action on the article Talk page. I was only able to track down that you were the source of this action in the Deletion logs.
Can you please undo your delete action? — DV 11:21, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I'm really sorry, Dave. I thought it was a newly created junk page. You are right - I should have checked. I also should not be editing when I am tired. Going against wikipedia policy was unintentional. I'll see if I can find a way to undelete, but don't know if it's possible. Pollinator 12:21, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding and at least offering an explanation of what happened.
- It's my understanding that there are archives of recently deleted articles, back to the last purge that takes place after backups are made. Since your delete is very recent, the article should still be there. I am not an Admin, so please consult with one of the more experienced Admins if you are unsure how to access the deleted article archives.
- If it turns out the article has been purged before you can recover it, here is a partial restore from the Google cache of the article some number of days ago. I'll appreciate it if you can avoid using this partial restore, because a large number of edits were made after this archived version, and it would be unfair to those editors to throw out all of their work. — DV 12:49, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Reversion of North Carolina
I would like to know why you disregarded my edit of the article on North Carolina. I feel that maybe you thought I inserted an unnecessary opinion, but it was historically the popular opinion. That's a fact.
Are you an administrator? I feel that if you are, this is inappropriate behavior. --Seth Goldin 13:56, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- (Copy also to Seth's page)You expressed an opinion in slangy, unencyclopedic language. Also the facts do not bear out the opinion - North Carolina has an excellent port at Wilmington. Pollinator 14:04, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Perhaps they had a port, but was it a developed natural port? Anyway, if you checked further into it, then that's great. My source could have been somewhat unreliable. Keep up the good work!--Seth Goldin 14:25, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
FYI
I saw that you added material to the "Niagara Falls" article. It is a "Featured article candidate" and I believe that, especially in its current state, it is a very deserving one. Steve "I never say 'fungicides and pesticides'" Fahey.Sfahey 21:30, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Question
Hi, Pollinator! I never thought I would be reading articles about bees, but one of my friends in Russia asked me to find this out. From what he told me, I understood that the Russian beekepers had used a certain Apistan or Apiston to treat Varroa mites. Now there's something new on the market for this thing, and they only produce it in the US. The article on Varroa mites in Wiki says the following:
"Varroa mites can be treated with commercially-available miticides. Miticides must be applied strictly according to the label in order to minimize the risk of contamination of honey that might be consumed by humans. Proper use of miticides will also help to slow the development of resistance among the mites. Varroa mites can also be controlled through non-chemical means..."
So, the article doesn't mention any names of commercially-available miticides. What do beekeepers use these days against these mites? Do you have any idea? How much does this thing cost? I would really appreciate it if you could help me out. Sorry for not e-mailing this to you, I don't know your e-mail :). Thanks! KNewman 16:50, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
Photo
Hi POllinator
Could you indicate to me what you consider your very best bee picture on wikipedia for quarto use ? I'd like to put one in the issue (with references and name, right ?). Thanks in advance. m:WQ/2 SweetLittleFluffyThing.
Thanks :-) SweetLittleFluffyThing
Explanation
Could you please go to talk:creation vs. evolution debate and explain how lack of conflict = false dichotomy? Most people think false dichotomies are caused by setting up two alternative points of view as if they were the only options, when they are not. Bensaccount 00:48, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Cotton flower pic
Hi Pollinator - in case you wonder where it's gone, I've moved Image:Cotton pollination 5892.JPG from cotton (about the fibre) to cotton plant (about the plant), as it is more appropriate there and I wanted to add another pic to the history section where it was - MPF 00:20, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I wonder if it wouldn't be more appropriate to also move the horicultural info to the plant page, or even on a page of its own. I could probably add some to it, since I'm in the middle of cotton country. I'm planning sometime soon to visit a museum which has a nineteenth century, home-made, wooden gin and I intend to take a lot of photos. Pollinator 03:28, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
Bald-Faced Hornet
I think your picture Image:Vespula_0078.JPG is mislabeled. It is definitely not a Bald-Faced Hornet, though it may indeed be a yellowjacket. Whatever it is, nice pic! -- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 01:54, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
Wild thyme
Hi Pollinator - I've not changed your details about its being important in Greece, but I don't think the Greek wild thyme honey will be from Thymus serpyllum, as that is (according to my books) a north European species of thyme. I guess the problem is that any thyme growing in the wild can be called wild thyme in a general sense, rather than specifically T. serpyllum which is the species called Wild Thyme in Britain. Maybe wild thyme should be made a redirect to thyme, with T. serpyllum described at Wild Thyme. Any thoughts? - MPF 15:02, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Certainly. I expected you, or someone in the area would fill out the details and make corrections. Someone from New Zealand added a number of monofloral honeys on the honey page (which is good, but makes the list somewhat unbalanced) and I wanted to note some of the rest of the world's famous monoflorals. I think these should be separated soon from the honey page, as it could make the page too big. BTW, I always ask folks who travel to bring me back a sample of the specialty honeys of the area. I was thus given a jar of Greek thyme honey, and it was very nice. There are others I wouldn't give two cents for. Pollinator 16:46, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
timber/lumber
Hi Pollinator - just added a note at talk:lumber. The real problem is that the very title 'lumber' itself is strongly US-centric; the word simply isn't used in other countries (apart from perhaps Canada?) - MPF 16:51, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't know that.Pollinator 03:11, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
...under the guise of science...
Concerning the edit (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Creationism&diff=10946981&oldid=10946496) that I made to the Creationism article, I removed the statement that "those who, under the guise of science, make the religious assumption/statement that there is no God" not because I disagree with that opinion, but because it is an opinion. If your intent was to present this as an opinion of a certain group, I think you should make your intent more clear in the article. For example, you could write "Evolutionary creationism has no dispute with the scientific theory of evolution either, but disputes (materialistic) evolutionists (who some evolutionary creationists believe act under the guise of science, and that the statement that there is no God is a religious one)." Since your reversion of my edit, user:Fubar Obfusco has edited (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Creationism&diff=0&oldid=10954413) the paragraph in question to fix this problem quite nicely, I think. --NoPetrol 22:52, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- It's pretty nice when you can engage in a debate (which is what you are doing here) and write your opponent's views to suit yourself. I made it perfectly clear that this was a creationist viewpoint, in fact it is one of the primary ones and one of the places where the whole range of creationists agree wholeheartedly. The fine distinction between methological and ontological is not a editorial correction, because this is a fallback position, not the one usually presented by materialistic or ideologic evolutionists, and only used when someone actually challenges their beginning religious assumption. So no, the present edit is NOT adequate; it is a distortion. Pollinator 02:43, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)
Joseph L. Goldstein
Hey Pollinator, thanks for Joseph L. Goldstein. Would you have a chance to write up Michael S. Brown as well? These guys have done more for cholesterol-related physiology than any other scientists! JFW | T@lk 12:22, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Pokeweed berries picture
Sure thing. I did that. I merged Poke salad into Pokeweed as well. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 14:37, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
Chief Logan photo
Pollinator, thanks for that great photo of the Chief Logan statue. If you get a chance, could you expand the caption in the article a bit? I assume the statue is at the "Chief Logan State Park," but this should be made clear in the caption. Also, the date the photograph was taken should be recorded either in the caption or on the image page. If known, the name of the scupltor and date the statue was created and/or placed should also be recorded, although I don't suppose you have that info. --Kevin Myers 18:40, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
Larval Food Plants
Thankyou for your very kind words. I'm concentrating on species we get in the UK at the moment but I'm hoping to go global soon! Richard Barlow 07:46, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Dear Pollinator,
I'm interested in using a photo you made for a cd cover. Please get in touch! pascal *at* mediaconnect.nl! Thanx! I hope you don't mind using this page to get in touch with you.
- Pasz
Smelting
Thanks for your contribution to Smelting. It would be helpful if in the future you provided an edit summary about the changes you have made.
- I have no idea what you are talking about. I did provide an edit summary!
BTW, please sign your notes. You can do it with four tildes. Pollinator 02:13, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
Response requested
Please respond on Talk:Theistic realism. Joshuaschroeder 04:37, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Done. Pollinator 18:39, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
Lens/camera
Hi Pollinator, I just saw your photo of a wasp stinger close up, and was wondering what lens and what camera you used to take this photo. Thanks, --Fir0002 08:29, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Nikon Coolpix 5000. Pollinator 18:40, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC)
Wasp stinger
Do you have a higher-resolution (larger file), and less compressed version of that image? If so, please upload. --brian0918™ 13:32, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Fundamentalism Article
Dear Sir (or Madam),
As a Fundamentalist, I thank you for your action in reversing that jerk's erasing all of Christian Fundamentalism's page. I wanted to let you know of my appreciation.
Saxonjf
theistic realism
just wanted to personally thank you for your support on the page, and your kind words on the VfD. you can't imagine how much i appreciate it:). Ungtss 05:36, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Overstepping authority
Hi, Pollinator. You reverted the addition of a commented warning in the Homeschooling "External links" section stating that the user who put the notice there was overstepping their authority. You commented that it was counter-Wikipedia policy to discourage edits. That notice was my idea, but I suggested it because that article has a huge problem with "link creep": a problem where advocates add links at an astounding rate, which makes the "External links" section almost useless. While I whole-heartedly embrace the be bold ethic of Wikipedia, for some articles--and for just one section--I think it makes sense to have to warning. Users were adding so many links and so quickly--the section had >100 extern links at one point--that we couldn't keep up with reviewing the sites and deciding whether they were worthwhile or not. Therefore, I think discussing links first before adding them makes sense. It'd cut down on too many spam and useless links: if a user isn't willing to make a case for their link, it probably isn't worthwhile. Anyway, that's my $.02 on the whole issue. I think the comment should be re-inserted, but not if it's going to ruffle any feathers.
BTW: Growing up, my family used to raise bees too. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 16:51, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
Category:Methodist theologians
Yes, I started a new category; feel free to contribute! I've added the "major" theologians I could remember. I understand your preference for Charles Wesley as opposed to John Wesley; Charles was a master poet (one of Christendom's all-time best, surely), whereas John was an organizational genius. Two great saints in one family...God bless them! KHM03 18:58, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your positive comment ...
... about my Christian Right comments. Also, your interests are similar to mine. Dad & I even kept bees years ago until Mom got to be too allergic for us to continue. Somehow, the fear that every politically active Christian is a knowing agent of the "vast right-wing conspiracy" is both humourous and simultaneously somehow sickening.
Loved your comment about "Catholics and Christians / fungicides and pesticides." A recent shooting victim here was just described on the TV news as being "manic-depressive and bipolar". Apparently he was white and Caucasian, as well.
Regards, Rlquall 03:23, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
Wasp stinger
Hi Pollinator
I was just in the process of promoting User:Brian0918's modified version of your Wasp Stinger photo. Before I plough ahead and change the images used in the articles, I just wanted to check that you are comfortable with the modified version. (Personally I might also be tempted to crop the left had edge to remove the distracting brown backround mark in the top left corner.) -- Solipsist 21:27, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
- Sure, I'm fine with that. Be my guest. Pollinator 22:14, May 11, 2005 (UTC)
Christian Right
Saw your comments on the Christian Right talk page and the mention of the Taliban brought to mind a quote I thought you might appreciate. From the West Wing episdoe "Isaac & Ishmael":
"Islam is to Islamic terrorist as Christianity is to KKK."
A reminder (one that was well articulated in your comments) that just because one is, let us say, devout in their beliefs, does not make them evil. I thought you might like it for a future revision.
Altogether great comments! Keep up the good work! Essjay 15:24, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
- It's unfortunate that common sense is so uncommon, but thanks for showing that it does still exist. Pollinator 23:55, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
I can tell ...
... that you "get" Fundamentalism. As some one who has known many (and befriended several) Fundamentalists, you seem to understand the difference between them and Evangelicals almost instinctively. This knowledge deserves a wider audience, and I would suppose that Wikipedia is about as good a place to start as any, since it has, along with its share of trolls, a lot of really bright, informed, caring, and articulate people. So keep up the good work! Rlquall 04:49, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Re: 54th Massachussetts
I agree that it's a notable topic, but there was no prior content under that title. You can see the full article history at Special:Undelete/54th Massachussetts Regiment. (I'd write something up myself, but what little history I'm comfortable relating is mostly science-oriented.) Cheers, -- Hadal 02:29, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Pic of the day
Hi David,
Just to let you know that your photo Image:Dragonfly eye 3811.jpg is due for a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 4th June. I've reused the caption from last time, but you can make any changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/June 4, 2005. -- Solipsist 08:11, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Tarantula Hawk
Do you have a photo of a picture of a tarantula hawk you could add to the article? WikiDon 04:00, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Focus on the Family
Hi Pollinator,
My apologies if my recent revert edit on Focus on the Family seemed to be POV, that was not my intent. I removed statements from the recent edit mainly because they were biased, or because I felt they needed verification. For example, the claim that the organization is "dedicated to nurturing and defending families worldwide" cannot remain in its current form. The organization clearly does not "nurture" or "defend" families with same-sex parents. Additionally, the terms "nurture" and "defend" are not of a neutral POV either.
Continuing through the initial paragraph, the next two sentences require verification. ""Focus on the Family" broadcast has over 1.5 million listeners daily in the United States alone. Focus on the Family has offices worldwide with a total audience of over 200 million." Especially the second sentence - Is the sentence referring to the broadcast again? How is this figure of 200 million measured? What is the audience receiving?
The second paragraph contains the statement "regarded as a major voice in the Christian right, generally promoting conservative policies." I felt that "socially conservative policies" was a more accurate term to use. Does the organization also promote other conservative policies, such as economic conservatism?
Lastly I feel that my labelling of the edit previous to mine as "vandalism" was accurate. I feel that the user's removal of the Category:LGBT rights opposition is a strong indicator of this.
Thank you for notifying me that my edit could be improved, I agree that it could. I'll conduct more research to try to shed light on the figures I've mentioned above. I look forward to working with you on this article. Kurieeto 20:51, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
spider venom
I saw your remarks on the seriousness of various kinds of spider bites. I would like to make the article objective and not dependent on the opinions of individuals. Therefore I will add some recent citations I've found. P0M 01:32, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've just spent an afternoon going through on-line references. I haven't found the one that lurks in the back of my mind as having a more medical approach (therefore giving LD-50 dose information, etc.). But here is a summary of what I've found so far:
- Phoneutria, Brazilian wandering spider
- Allegedly the most potent of all venoms, but frequently gives dry bites.
- Hexathelidae, Synney funnel-web
- Frequent fatalities even of adults before antivenin developed. (I seem to recall opinions that fatalities were almost certain before antivenin became available -- balanced with people who thought that many non-fatal bites might not have ever been reported. My impression is that everybody agrees that these spiders are much more aggressive than any others, so maybe any non-fatal bites were cases in which the person being bitten managed to fling the spider off before it delivered all of its venom.)
- Widow spiders
- 5% death rate in adults prior to antivenin availability Geometricus turns out to be the worst: LD-50 is 0.21-0.59 mg/g.
- Recluse spiders
- Deaths are rare.
- Hobo spider
- Contributory factor in one known death.
- Others:
- Loxosceles laeta
- MEDICAL IMPORTANCE
- The Chilean recluse is reputedly the most toxic species of Loxosceles, which have necrotizing venom, and it has been implicated in a few deaths in South America. The spider and its venom are under study at the Instituto Butantan in São Paulo, Brazil.
One source that I saw a few days ago remarked that, world-wide, the widow spiders cause the most fatalities because they are widespread, they hang out where people hang out, and it looks like they don't often bother with dry bites. Maybe they don't always deliver a full dose, however. Recluse spider bites can be extremely debilitating, but there are different levels and mechanisms of damage. The deadly incidents involve a kind of cascade effect if I remember correctly. The venom causes compounds normally present in the human body to break up into other compounds which are themselves toxic and which cause further break-ups. Kidney and liver problems are probably the actual cause of deaths in these cases.
One thing that makes widow spiders particularly problematical for humans is that while they often do not kill adults because it's a body weight/venom weight issue, children don't have enought body mass to diffuse their venom to non-lethal levels. Another thing is that these spiders will not run away from humans unless they are physically jarred, so curious children could get quite close to them and reach into the web and grab one of them with a pretty good certainty of actually catching one. The other dangerous spiders have pretty good vision and would not easily let themselves be caught -- except for the Sydney funnel-web spiders which, I gather, would stand their ground. I recall that as a child I was taught about black widow spiders, cautioned to leave them alone, etc. Redently in California there was a flurry of accusations against a kind of red-backed jumping spider. I've been playing with jumping spiders for 50 years and have yet to see one behave aggressively, so since lots of the reported bites involved children I kind of wonder whether children have tried to catch the pretty things. Most of the Phidippus species are fairly calm around people, so it may be that the red-backed ones are fairly easy to catch. I know from experience that jumping spiders will bite if you squeeze them. I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that children have sometimes played with widow spiders if nobody has warned them about their venom, or that they might carelessly blunder into contact with them while exploring stuff in their back yards. P0M 20:26, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
sandbox testing
hi dude, i just was testing the flexibility of the website. i hope i didnt get banned. however, i appreciate that there are people like yourself who stick around to ensure the quality of the material on the website. really, i was testing, and not really for the sandbox, then my test wouldnt work. anyhow, the test was to see if anyone was watching and if nobody cared, i would have changed it back anyhow. well , that was fun and i am fascinated with wiki, yet i have to see a WA ( wiki anonymous ), i did read about wikiholics on wired magazine the other week.
Tireless drone
Barnstar-rotating.gif
Hi Pollinator,
For all your extensive and high quality contributions, such as this answer (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bumblebee&diff=15130579&oldid=15124533), pictures like this and this and heck too many good articles to mention, I award you with the Tireless Contributor Barnstar — the most appropriate barnstar for an Old Drone. -- Solipsist 19:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
the list
Hi - Would you mind if I moved your comment to the list's talk page - I really hate fragmented discussions. BTW - did you read the thread that's already on the talk page? Or the thread on the talk for WP:RFA? In any event, please let me know if it's OK to move your comment. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:17, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)