Kevmin
If I posted on your talk page, you can reply on your talk page and I'll be watching your page. This makes it easier for both of us to keep everything in context. Thanks.
Blepharoceridae
editRe: Canyon Diablo
editHey, thanks so much for helping out on the article. That was really kind of you. Did I already ask you about Kaibab Sea? I can't remember. Viriditas (talk) 08:26, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
- Why did the Kaibab sea favor sharks? Viriditas (talk) 20:51, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
- I see now that this is a taphonomic bias. That makes more sense. Viriditas (talk) 21:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
- Viriditas I didnt have a chance to look into this, but my initial thought when you posted was to suggest site specific biases, it sounds like that wasnt far off the mark.--Kevmin § 14:23, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
- You were right! Any chance we can add native species that make their home in the canyon? Viriditas (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- @Viriditas: Are you thinking modern natives flora/fauna? I'll see if I can dig up anything.--Kevmin § 16:08, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- I think our best lead is starting here which places Canyon Diablo into the Painted Desert ecology.--Kevmin § 16:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- You were right! Any chance we can add native species that make their home in the canyon? Viriditas (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2026 (UTC)
- Viriditas I didnt have a chance to look into this, but my initial thought when you posted was to suggest site specific biases, it sounds like that wasnt far off the mark.--Kevmin § 14:23, 9 April 2026 (UTC)
- I see now that this is a taphonomic bias. That makes more sense. Viriditas (talk) 21:18, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
Hello there! You are invited to participate in the Destubathon of the Americas, a contest/editathon which will run from May 1 to May 31. The goal is to destub as many of our 475,000+ stubs for the Americas (from Alaska down to Chile) as possible. A good chance to have fun in expanding many of our old stale stubs and win up to £2000 ($2680) in Amazon vouchers for expanding stub articles. Sign up in the Contestants/participants section on the contest page if interested. Even if not interested in prizes you are still warmly welcome to participate in it as an editathon! Hopefully we can achieve something significant in the month of May together! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:55, 22 April 2026 (UTC)
DYK for Bolt Creek fire
editPhlebolepis
editOn Phlebolepis, you said that I removed "details and clarity" from the article. However, you didnt explain what was removed. I can't put something back if you don't tell me what I removed. Instead of removing the "details and clarity", you reverted the whole thing, which is not constructive. Yixpoleg (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Yixpoleg: As a start, this is an encyclopedia that is dedicated to a general audiance. In your edits across multiple articles today you have been removing detail for generality, or removed detail for obscurity. At Phlebolepis (NOTE genus and species names are always formatted in italics per MOS) you removed the period, (Late Silurian) from the prose leaving only "Ludlow epoch" in text, which you pipped so it was unclear to any general reader. Additionally in the taxobox the {{extinct}} template is not needed on EVERY species name, neither is the full genus name for the species, †P. species is correct, while at the same time you removed the authorities from the names in the taxobox, for the stub species section, which might have been fine, except you clearly do not understand the role of punctuation mark up in taxonomic names. You put both authorities into parenthesis, but per Nom rules, NIETHER should have been in them. (Author, date) has a very specific meaning in taxonomic writing, which you have repeatedly been called out for violating. You needlessly added a second link to Thelodonti, contrary to MOS which state only link a first instance of a linkable term. Not to mention the wholly unnecessary nowiki you dumped into the prose.--Kevmin § 21:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC)