This user 7 December 2014. Bugboy52.40 has not edited Wikipedia for a considerable amount of time. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Bugboy52.4online
Home     Talk     Contribs     Awards     Sandbox     Gallery     E-Mail ¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨``°º¤ø„¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨``°º¤ø„¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨``°º¤ø„¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ø¤º°¨¨°º¤ø„¸

I've heard that you participate in most of the insect-related WikiProjects. Could you please join WikiProject Beetles? Your work there will be much valued and appreciated. Please join today! Gug01 (talk) 22:12, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

/Archive 1 /Archive 2

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello active member of Wikiproject Cats. There is currently a discussion as to whether or not feline acne shoudl be merged into cat skin disorders here. Your opinion would be valued. Brambleclawx 23:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Bugboy52.40, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some files that I found on User:Bugboy52.40/Gallery. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note about your signature: per Wikipedia:Signatures#Transclusion of templates, using templates as signatures is forbidden. Could you at least subst: your signature template? Thanks. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 04:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at MC10's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hey there. I noticed you have created a whole bunch of articles over time re: genus/species on insects etc. (among many other classes and species I am sure). I recently started a sub list over at the missing encyclopedia wikiproject Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Global Names Index and within it, there being a list of ~18 million names (note not species but names: see the link above for explanations) and with each name, comes an external reference and sometimes multiple references. I was wondering if you would be willing to show me/tell me how you managed to create the articles so quickly as I am guessing you used some sort of tool/script to extract the info from external websites. This might be a bit tricky in that there are multiple external websites (which is good for the genus page as more quality references the better) but yeah, any info you can provide would be much appreciated. Oh and feel free to help out as an example so I can see for myself what the process looks like (i.e. using your programs/scripts to make a multitude of articles based from the list). Oh and see this for background information: [1]. Cheers!Calaka (talk) 10:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey that is no problem Bugboy! Hmmm, do you think if I give you a list of genera and species you to get your hand busy on creating a whole bunch of articles? Maybe we can do 100 at a time and have them placed on a subfolder out of mainspace and once I take a look through them then use another program to add them on? Do you think you would be able to extract info from more than one website though (as in just the basic layout of the article followed by all the references at the end? Then I can look through the pages and add more info like location and distribution once I read through the refs). Currently I am waiting on Raul to perfect the list (as at the moment there are multiple names that are not to be made into articles) but yeah, it wont be long before he gets it in order. Kind regards!Calaka (talk) 05:09, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you placed the "invited to join WikiProject Insects" on the user page of AJseagull1 here, the code has a <center> but no corresponding </center>, which results in the rest of the page being centered. I fixed it, but I wanted to let you know in case it was from a template or something. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  08:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

wooops, glad you fixed it. Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 16:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check this out. NERDYSCIENCEDUDE (✉ msg • changes) 00:09, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lol, I'm use to it by now, in fact I actually stole it from someone myself :P Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 01:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bug!
I asked this simple question at the Science Reference desk and it got not even one comment before going to archives. Your thoughts greatly appreciated.
--Shirt58 (talk) 13:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you indeed! Though I find Cryptic species complex fascinating, I'm just teeny little bit waaay out of my depth here. Following your help, I've made a few Wading pool-sized changes to the article. Thank you again! --Shirt58 (talk) 13:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look to WP-Grafic-Studio - may be you have a idea concerning your famous icon?! Thanks! Markus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.8.185.191 (talk) 17:27, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Famous? thanks.. but yea, I'll give it a try even though I don't speak German well. Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 01:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coming soon to a Wiki near you...The Third Great Wikipedia Dramaout will be July 5-9. Please join us for serious content creation! Signup is here. You have received this message because you participated in The Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout.

A tag has been placed on Xenophasia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding ((hangon)) to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 21:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ɡreen12.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Stop! Before It's Too Late and We've Destroyed it All sample.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add ((bots|deny=DASHBot)) to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the link to the (un-refereed) preprint: http://precedings.nature.com/documents/5138/version/1 You're best reading the PDF file, as the HTML conversion isn't wonderful. The part I was discussing on the reference desk is in sections 4 & 5. Best wishes. Physchim62 (talk) 03:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently started editing in Wikipedia. I have just added my name to the [WikiProject Insects] and have expanded the articles on Acleris variegana and the Diamondback moth. Some feedback would be welcome. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bugboy52.40, I recommend that you work in main article space for Lepidoptera, not in user space. Also, polymorphism is adequately covered in Lepidoptera and does not need expansion. So don't merge that Polymorphism article back into Lepidoptera. Other sections such as behaviour, etc need development. What is needed is not rewriting at this point but addition of more referenced material. After External morphology of Lepidoptera becomes GA , I will switch to Lepidoptera. AshLin (talk) 03:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By working in article mainspace, I could contribute by overseeing your edits, giving suggestions, adding stuff etc. I did not even know you were working on Lepidoptera till I saw your merge notice and checked your recent contribs. I try to add material to that article whenever I get a chance. By encyclopedia do you mean Resh & Carde? I have that too! Got access recently. AshLin (talk) 14:08, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The morphology of an insect, strictly speaking includes not only the adult but also the development stages. In Lepidoptera, I tried to keep only morphological attributes in the morphology section while development, and other natural history issues were restricted to life cycle. You are welcome to change the structure as you deem fit as it does feel clunky. AshLin (talk) 14:26, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That I would not recommend as discussion of head, thorax, abdomen is in the scope of External morphology of Lepidoptera, not Lepidoptera itself. I just deleted some unnecessary subheadings. I think the article looks better now. What do you think? AshLin (talk) 14:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please go ahead with your edits. However on no account put it through GA because as of now it lacks completeness to the standard required by GA. I plan to work on the completeness checking, sectio by section as soon as I complete my GAN on External morphology. Plus I have access to university resources once a week and some books of my own including an ancient copy of Imms recently borrowed. Keeping this in mind, please improve it but dont put it under GA. If it is put up for GA with incomplete material as of now, my conscience would require me to quick fail it till I feel it is suitably done. The reason I am delaying is I plan to use all lessons learnt from the current GA on the next one - Lepidoptera -so that its tackled in a better fashion. Hope this helps. AshLin (talk) 05:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great work. Please keep it up! AshLin (talk) 04:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, sometimes I forget where to reply. BTW :-) you definitely want to arouse the interest of your reader, not curb it, he he. If you feek yo have done your bit, why not try modifying that phylogeny diagram like I told you so as t make your claim even stronger? AshLin (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Its a great diagram. Good that we got that issue cleared up before we went in for GAN. AshLin (talk) 04:53, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed all the GAN issues at present. Waiting for any additional comments by reviewer. Great job on Lepidoptera. Boy are you one WikiOgre! AshLin (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Phylogenetic chart of Lepidoptera.svg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the ((GFDL-self)) tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 07:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC). If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Acather96 (talk) 07:39, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bugboy, your creating this file and claiming copyright is incorrect. This is a copyright violation. I am removing this image till its status is above dispute. The image is virtually identical to that in Resh & Carde where they have stated that their image is modified/based on Labandeira et al. (1994). For you to claim it as your creation, it has to e a completely new visualisation of the data and has to be different in the way the info is depicted. You also still need to acknowledge the source of the information which has not been done. AshLin (talk) 04:53, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I dont exactly know. Perhaps the first thing to do is to redraw the diagram in a different way, maybe reducing some data, by converting it to horizontal, relabelling headings, including other information. After that you have to state in the page its sources to avoid WP:PLAGIARISM. Im sure you understand that Copyright Violation is reproducing someone else's work without permission while Plagiarism is passing off someone else's work/information as your own. To be on the safe side, you could also post on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions to check if anything more needs to be done. And yes, upload the new diagram with own work tag not copyright holder release tag. Hope this helps. AshLin (talk) 05:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great going so far. Good night. AshLin (talk) 05:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Loved the Gypsy moth image. Trust its your own original idea. AshLin (talk) 06:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you get the issue clarified on the message-board I told you about to be sure? You may have missed out some finer nuance of understanding. One question which may arise is whether prior permission is required else it may be a case of copyright violation as copyright prevents you from making derivatives as I understand it. I am sure Resh & Cade took permission from the authors Kristensen etc. The publishing industry does this as a matter of routine. Secondly I still recommend changing the diagram as I proposed reducing some information, say the early, middle, late divisions for each geological age, switching to horizontal etc so that your claim is stronger. Please realise it is not me that you have to convince but to get your position explicitly clarified and to follow the right course of action. AshLin (talk) 03:27, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Graphic Lab.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Thank you for the invit, but I am not the man. I have not an overvue of the order. Books on this subject exist with about thousand pages... It is not easy to resume. Jacqueshb (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/tutorial/Communication/viscomm.html is a great source for communication relating to insects, and the insect article.

• gastric caecae to be added to the digestive system
• corpus allatum & Prothoracicotropic hormone to insect endocrine system
• The gonopore & spermatheca in insect reproduction + this source
• File:Evolution_insect_mouthparts_coloured.svg
• [2]
• anatomy
• anatomy
• immune system
• [[3]] - food related terms
• evolution
• insect walking
• respiratory system
• mouthparts/feeding
• Myrmeconema neotropicum interesting parasitism in ants
• Cockroach drawing
• morphogenesis -[4]
• [5]
• Imaginal disc - for metamorphosis
• User:Siga/pictures has good diagrams of species morphology
• insect keys and tutorials

Internal morphology is still not complete imho. We need to learn what are the characteristics of Lepidopteran internal morphology as compared to that of a generic insect and portray them. Only reproduction is not enough. Perhaps GAN notice is premature. AshLin (talk) 04:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would be pleased to help in any way you would like. Fresh from the February Wikification Drive, would you like me to go through the article making trivial changes such as improving this statement:

In many species, the female may be able to produce anywhere from 200 to 600 eggs, while in some others it may go as high as 30,000 eggs in one day. which leaves a large number of caterpillars, which in effect can mow down entire acres of crops. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment there is a reference error for ref no 26. It currently says that the authority is "ref name="Gullan"/>" but previously it said "ref name="Gillot"/>". Do you think it should be changed back? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your referencing system. For example, what does ^: 246 (in curly brackets) mean? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm leaving the references for you to deal with but I have made various minor alterations. You can see which sections I have worked on and what I have done by viewing the History. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bugboy52.40,
Will do. I'll try to be the best tame non-scientist WP:WikiProject Insects has ever had.
--Shirt58 (talk) 14:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bugboy, Just wanted to check in and say thanks for the invite to work on Lepidoptera. I am a better copy-editor than entomologist, so you may want to look over any edits I have made to make sure I did not unintentionally change the content in correcting the grammar! Also, I voted in support of your proposal at the RFC-- it makes sense to me, and I think it would help, not hinder, the insect articles on this site. Best, Lo, i am real 00:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I find I have no patience for the tons of talk you need for getting these type of proposals through. I tire very soon. I wish you all the best, though! AshLin (talk) 14:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just over two years ago, you wrote the article Liacarus palmicinctum, and I was wondering if you remembered or could find out what references you used when writing it. With unreferenced stubs, I will often find a new reference and write a new sentence or two to replace what we had, but this article is too detailed for that kind of treatment, I think. If you could provide it with inline references, that really would be great. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:27, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

insect svg images

Thank you, I just loved that infestation! It's your turn now with Lepidoptera. AshLin (talk) 15:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Bugboy52.40!
Normally, I'd jump in and start the article and let the experts sort it out, but in view of the WP:GA nomination, I wouldn't want Transverse orientation to point to a stubby little article. I've got a starting point, but to be honest, the topic is a bit too maths-y for me. Is "transverse orientation" in moths well-attested in the literature, or should we just work around it?
Yours in bug-ness, --Shirt58 (talk) 10:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On this page, you've added lots of terms that are linked to redirects back to this page. How is this helpful? Please discuss. Rwalker (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article Lepidoptera you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Lepidoptera for things which need to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your input on the stubs. You said you have a program to create articles. I forgot all about Wikipedia:CSV. I've used it before, and it is very effective and easy to use. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:33, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah great! You signed too.. I dont know exactly how and when we are receiving access. I am guessing they are waiting until 400 have signed up before sending the details over to Credo. We will just have to wait and see..! Cheers Ruigeroeland (talk) 10:23, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at Scray's talk page.
Message added 00:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

I hope this suits your needs Scray (talk) 00:23, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The Wikiproject Lepidoptera Barnstar
		For leading the way in getting Lepidoptera developed into a Good Article! AshLin (talk) 17:08, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome. AshLin (talk) 04:24, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment on my page about copyediting Lepidoptera. I ran out of time to do much more, but am glad to see it made GA. Bob1960evens (talk) 16:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have a great source for you. It is entirely CC-3.0, so you can use every scrap of info including pictures. It is a catalogue of all beetle family group names including fossils, see: http://www.pensoft.net/journals/zookeys/article/807/abstract/family-group-names-in-coleoptera-insecta- Ruigeroeland (talk) 07:42, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, it would be best suited for a Taxonomy of Coleoptera article, but you might be interested in that later on. Cheers and keep up the good work! Ruigeroeland (talk) 13:30, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great user page! I ask a favor. Recently, User:WereSpielChequer has asked me to begin congratulating editors as they reach the 100K plateau. I have been using the Tireless Contributor Barnstar which was OK but, to tell the truth, a bit boring. I was searching for a new more appropriate barnstar or for someone that could create one...and then I saw your work of art at User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me's talk page. Striking and beautiful. Eye-catching! I ask that I could present your fine barnstar to all future 100K editors. It is a vast improvement over what is now presented to them. It is like comparing parchment to tissue paper. Further, I may retreat and replace your barnstar for the one previously placed at about a dozen 100K editors, with your sanction. Thanking you in advance. Buster Seven Talk 21:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks, Bugboy. What I need is a template of the award that I can personalize the message, etc. and then I cut-n-paste and add to the recipiants page. Feel free to add a designer recognition mention somewhere, probably in small font. Unless there is a different way. I'm not a tech so I may be doing it like the 63 year old that I am. Nice to meet you. I have some other barnstars that I will need help with. More about that later. See User:Buster7/Sandbox-100K AwardsBuster Seven Talk 00:57, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at [[User talk:Buster Seven Talk|User talk:Buster Seven Talk]].
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

Hello, Bugboy52.40. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((You've got mail)) or ((ygm)) template.

AshLin (talk) 08:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi bugboy who and or what is represented by this flag File:Venzwalian Flag.jpg? Awg1010 (talk) 19:05, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Wow, that was uploaded more then 3 years ago. I haven't got the slightest clue for what though, why do you ask? Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 20:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)"[reply]

Well on the commons it is categorized in "Unidentified flags" and I was hoping to place it where it could be found by a descriptive search. Awg1010 (talk) 02:07, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Good Job. — Bryan Anderson (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

		The (Personalized) Article Barnstar
		Thanks for making lots of fantastic articles about insects in the genus Chlaenius. Keep up the good work and thanks for the articles. ~~EBE123~~ talkContribs 20:48, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I can save you some headaches and create those talkpages for you with AWB, if you like. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:14, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any time. The barnstar wasn't mine, actually - but I support it wholeheartedly. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 05:18, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not running a bot to create all those stubs, are you? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 05:25, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Keep it up. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 05:33, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there are asterisk behind the binomial name? I cannot think of a reason why that should be there. Furtermore, I am wondering what the point of these stubs is. There is no info in them at all, even less than there is in the genus, because you left out the binomial authority as well. Are you going back to flesh them out? If not I fear they will be turned into redirects when user stemonitis spots them... Just warning.. :) Ruigeroeland (talk) 15:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I only know he turned tons of articles similar to the ones you created into redirs. Dont know about consensus... Anyway, it would be better to at least at some basic info I think. Cheers! Ruigeroeland (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are aware that WP:BOTPOL deals with "Automated or partially automated editing processes" (my emphasis)? It seems like these articles would most certainly be covered by the bot policy, and should have received prior approval. Also, like Ruigeroeland, I cannot quite see what purpose these articles fill that could not be filled by a list and redirects. BTW, here you can read User:Stemonitis's rationale for merging. Lampman (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't miss it: Curlyhair tarantula. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 17:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

66.229.227.191 (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your offer (several months ago now!) to help identify insect photos. Here are a couple from a suburban environment near the Aegean coast of Turkey: [6] (something like a shield-bug, fairly large: about 25 mm long) and [7] (a scarabaeus? of similar size). Please advise also whether or not you think they’d be useful (i.e. of adequate quality and not duplicating existing shots) if I were to upload them to Commons. Can you identify arachnids as well?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your entomological knowledge is appalling, I would appreciate if you stopped vandalising Wikipedia with false information. For instance, there is no such thing as a "Harvest Mite Larva" as mites are arachnids and thus hemimetabolous - undergoing incomplete metamorphosis.

Regards.

I appreciate your criticism, however there are more constructive ways of going about this. Also, not to contribute to your nonsensical banter, you clearly know mites are arachnids therefore it would be arachnological not entomolgical, as that involves the study of insects. If have an argument to project, please use resources to back yourself up, as clearly I have done in the article I written (Trombiculidae) which is backed up by numerous books which also states the lower nymphal stages as larvae before there are fully grown to adults. Bugboy52.4 ¦ =-= 19:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have no intention of getting into an edit war with you, so, please can you revert your own reversion of my edit to Insect morphology ... that paragraph is unsourced and utter rubbish! If not, I will have to seek advice of admins. Thanks, Stho002 (talk) 06:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, it has been taken care of ... Stho002 (talk) 04:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You seems to be more reasonable than the other bunch of "friends". Who got in ownership the article: INSECT. 1. I found the talk page entrance regarding my edit by accident only. Nobody was kind of to give me a clue: somebody finally decided to discus with me changes to the article. 2. Administrator should look in first into quality of the edit instead who accuse anybody for something "unpleased". 3. I return automatically my paragraph (which is with reasonable resources) if the ERASER do not start with arguments and proposed changes. 4. I am not going to start discussion if somebody start and continue with repeated ERASEANINGS. Administrator should block the ERASER instead RETURNER of resourced scientific info.67.224.86.242 (talk) 19:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

• From the Editor
• What are You doing For Lent?
• Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
• Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

---

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom

Science lovers wanted!

Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in entomlogy! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Blue icon.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 13:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in this image the tag 'costa' should actually be 'nodus', greetz, Bart -B kimmel (talk) 16:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, could the first insect wing-related thing you do when you get back be to fix the colors in the text? They are distracting me a bit too much to do a thorough content review. I'll review for content right after they are fixed. StringTheory¹¹ 17:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a reminder that there is one day left for the "on hold" phase of the GA review. StringTheory¹¹ 14:47, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:10, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, What I meant about bugs is in the sense of true bugs, not the everyday term of "bug" as a refernce to what we should call "incests".XD0248 sign 22:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, your entomological knowledge is appalling, I would appreciate if you stopped vandalising Wikipedia with false information. For instance, there is no such thing as a "Harvest Mite Larva" as mites are arachnids and thus hemimetabolous - undergoing incomplete metamorphosis.

Regards.

Hello Bugboy. Someoneone pointed out (but did nothing about) the fact that Phloeophagy was the correct spelling. Though this was true, I did not get too excited, and just applied a few corrections (it is hardly a term in frequent use, after all!) In fact I began by leaving the existing redir in place, as it is not conspicuous, and someone might well stumble onto the correct spelling by entering the misspelling. Then I began to check the usage in google and I was shocked to see that inappropriate and unchecked reliance on WP's text had inflated the refs to the incorrect spelling to over 1000, vs <200 for the correct spelling! If there is one terrifying about WP, it is the responsibility for propagating errors. So I would like a deletion of the redir for the incorrect spelling. Now, I was about to put in a request for deletion myself, (having already put in a redir for the correct spelling, that I might inflate to an article in the near future) but I thought it might be better to find whether you would not prefer to do the deletion yourself; I for one prefer to correct my own finger troubles, and I assumed you might feel the same way about such things.

In case you are wondering about my justification for these views, you can look up the refs I added to Glossary of entomology terms and my remarks in Talk:Phloeophagy. Cheers, JonRichfield (talk) 14:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BB, I don't know whether my talk page is on your watchlist, so I don't know whether you have seen that I have posted a response to your Insect feeding habits idea there. JonRichfield (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

hello there! just saw you're a participant in the insects project. i created a few stubs recently, and was wondering if the project needed some assistance in that regard. i hope you can let me know. cheers! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at Odysseus1479's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.

—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:34, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I notice you maintain the Beetle page and are willing to verify sourcing. FYI, I repaired [8][9] an apparent copyvio from PMID 18832638 which I happened to spot here. The content appears to have been added during this series of edits, sourced to a book published in 1993 (whereas PMID 18832638 is a research paper from 2008). Not having access to the book/s currently cited, I have not attempted to verify the sourcing myself. 86.161.251.139 (talk) 05:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Beetle has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

• I see the issue is more generalized: [10]

86.161.251.139 (talk) 09:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Beetle, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from http://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=%22Patterns+of+beetle+diversity+can+illustrate+factors+that+have+led+to+the+success%22, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Beetle and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Beetle, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:Beetle with a link to where we can find that note.
• If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Beetle. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Beetle saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Nczempin (talk) 11:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bugboy52.40. You have new messages at Odysseus1479's talk page.
Message added 07:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the ((Talkback)) or ((Tb)) template.[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Eustaudingeria has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Proposing for Youngdrake. Article is non-notable and has very little comment about a non-notable animal. Does not meet WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ 話 ♪} ߷ _{♀ 投稿 ♀} 12:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that I did not know how. Sorry if I look like i'm messing the place up on purpose. --Youngdrake (talk) 12:05, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Are you still actively editing? If so, I have some questions about the Lepidoptera article AND why is there almost no activity going on in this project? bpage (talk) 00:52, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested change to Lepidopotera article

Hi, I just thought I'd let you know that I have added a comment to the Talk page for the Lepidoptera article, suggesting that a small correction to the phylogeny diagram is needed. I'm not sure if you are editing that page still, but I thought I'd let you know anyway. Regards, Piano beat (talk) 21:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

E-e-bayer_lover (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, 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 Christmas cheer by adding ((subst:Xmas3)) to their talk page with a friendly message.

And remember to keep the CHRIST in CHRISTmas! — Preceding unsigned comment added by E-e-bayer lover (talk • contribs) 22:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

= Recruitment for Wikipedian Interview

Hello Bugboy52.40,

We’d like to invite you to participate in a study that aims to explore how WikiProject members coordinate activities of distributed group members to complete project goals. We are specifically seeking to talk to people who have been active in at least one WikiProject in their time in Wikipedia. Compensation will be provided to each participant in the form of a $10 Amazon gift card.

The purpose of this study is to better understanding the coordination practices of Wikipedians active within WikiProjects, and to explore the potential for tool-mediated coordination to improve those practices. Interviews will be semi-structured, and should last between 45-60 minutes. If you decide to participate, we will schedule an appointment for the online chat session. During the appointment you will be asked some basic questions about your experience interacting in WikiProjects, how that process has worked for you in the past and what ideas you might have to improve the future.

You must be over 18 years old, speak English, and you must currently be or have been at one time an active member of a WikiProject. The interview can be conducted over an audio chatting channel such as Skype or Google Hangouts, or via an instant messaging client. If you have questions about the research or are interested in participating, please contact Michael Gilbert at (206) 354-3741 or by email at mdg@uw.edu.

We cannot guarantee the confidentiality of information sent by email.

Link to Research Page: m:Research:Means_and_methods_of_coordination_in_WikiProjects — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgrobison (talk • contribs) 20:26, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bugboy, I need help in taxonomy for this insects, I want to put Feautered nominee, but would like to name them. This insects also jump a bit. Regards, --PetarM (talk) 07:10, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Shoutbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:55, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you're aware; another editor proposed merging one of the many Eremiaphila articles you created (yes, just one) with the Mantis article (rather than the Eremiaphila article, or Eremiaphilidae). I found that proposal to be rather odd, and have removed the template, as it hardly seemed to merit a discussion. At least, not without giving the person who created the article a chance to weigh in. I'm assuming you had not seen the proposal, so you might want to keep an eye on this, in case they re-propose it. Dyanega (talk) 06:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dr. Blofeld has created Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:13, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 55 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African wildlife articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance. If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing any article related to a topic you often work on, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Might be a good way to work on fleshing out articles you've long been meaning to target and get rewarded for it! Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 04:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:Welcome to Bugboy52.40.svg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Personal file, no foreseeable encyclopedic use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated files)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated files)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 00:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andraphisia is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andraphisia until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  04:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rhyncobombyx is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhyncobombyx until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  04:47, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article Rhagoletis jumiperina has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:V, no evidence of it even as a misspelling

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Abductive (reasoning) 08:21, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Cephalia femoralis requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an individual animal that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Simuliid talk 05:43, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cephalia femoralis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cephalia femoralis until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Shirt58 (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Hebia cinerea has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Species does not exist; per Preliminary Checklist of the Tachinidae (Diptera) of the World, Hebia is a monotypic genus. This should be an unambiguous deletion.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Kazamzam (talk) 12:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hebia cinerea is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hebia cinerea until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Kazamzam (talk) 21:16, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]