The following text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.

Excellent work on E obliqua. Not sure about Bolands density. What does (he/she) say? I have the older Bootle, and it is born out by my experience, Messmate is pretty dense, heavier than E regnans, but nowhere near as dense as something like ironbark. Without actually doing the measurement myself I'd say 700kg/m - 800kg/m would be about right.MarkAnthonyBoyle 00:04, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was working this one up to FA and had started a stubby Symbolism section, which I was intending to change to Symbolism and folklore and add any aboriginal folklore info I could find when I found the page on Yagan. Not being sure the significance of the feathers I was wondering if you knew anymore and could add anything (or mention how etc.) to the above article. PS: The stuff to Banksia ericifolia is all good. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi :) Could you have a look over the "Description" section of this quickly? I will be doing more work on this and other national parks articles soon (watch out for Tathra National Park, Watheroo and Chichester-Millstream), but wanted to get a second opinion on this one first. Seems like a nice spot if I ever get a car (or a licence, or preferably both). Orderinchaos 08:21, 12 August 2007 (UTC) Edit: Did Tathra similarly.[reply]

Excellent, that's the sort of feedback I was looking for. A lot of that info is gettable, so shouldn't be a problem. Thanks :) Orderinchaos 06:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so are you saying that if I can't learn to use copyright tags better, just don't upload images at all? I think that is a very good idea, you gave me a big spook when I received that message on my talk page. Thank you for your help. Auroranorth 11:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, do I have your permission to edit the notes page User:Hesperian/Notes/Place redirects to strike out ones I wish to create? Auroranorth 11:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait, I can see others have edited that page, and instructions to people other than yourself are given. Auroranorth 11:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why redirects like that could be so bad. If Albany, Australia exists, why can't the others? Auroranorth 12:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pengo (talk · contribs) has been throwing in an extra, unnecessary header in the article because thet feel it absolutely necessary to have a reference for status in the taxobox, and there was none in the relevant paragraph that they could duplicate. Think you can make them happy? Circeus 01:51, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind that. I misread the diff and thought that paragraph wasn't sourced. Someone just removed the source because the link has died though. I replaced it with a link to the act, but you might want to see if you can find a more accessible source. Circeus 02:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May need some of the links to the other politicans and places put in but I'll leave that for other history buffs Dan arndt 05:35, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you also remove Norfolk of the list of countries? Berton 14:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to clarify what you mean on the Template talk:Coord page. (I probably agree - I think the globe icon is unnecessary - but as it stands I don't know what I'm agreeing with :P ) Orderinchaos 06:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Until now,Wikipedia has never permittedicons to be sprinkled through the actualtext. I am very stronglyopposed to what I see as the first stepdown that path. Hesperian 12:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except... you're totally wrong. It's the long-standing for MediaWiki to use icons to identify links to non-webpages. I believe it would be confusing to have something that looks like a link to a webpage really be a button to bring up a map.--Gmaxwell 14:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out it's a problem with meta (an associate of mine who edits de.wikipedia has noticed the same problem there with an entirely different template), as soon as it becomes clearer where to lodge a point of order there I intend to do so. Orderinchaos 04:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Followup - I've started a thread on the topic here. Orderinchaos 04:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can i post it? I think its got a few good refs, which ive added, thoughts? Also, cheersfor the heads up on Moyes, ive posted that article, it was a pretty decent obituary. Twenty Years 06:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I've been uploading plates to Commons:Illustrationes Florae Novae Hollandiae. I haven't got good scans of all of them, so for completeness I have uploaded crappy black-and-white scans for the plates that I am missing. I was wondering if you can identify the Stylidium in the upper left corner of Image:Illustrationes Florae Novae Hollandiae plate 15.jpg? Hesperian 06:53, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it's Stylidium calcaratum. It'd be neat to have the original! --Rkitko ^(talk) 13:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tasmanians are indeed lucky enough to be quite literate - and the tasmanian project has a tasmanian literature page [1] - more than WA can muster together :) SatuSuro 10:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need all the hints I can get! I noted the volume here, and established that he is an authority (Hügel?), though most of the species were transferred. The remainder are a perplexing bunch, as it happens ... stub Nice work with the new page, I will enjoy reading through the links. Cheers– Cygnis insignis 11:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Meeting under bridges] Oops, very sorry about that. I was busy with this stub. I'll upload those images for you, by the way. I did the first few of Curtis's vol 1 - found a few errors with that other places version. I like the Edward's stuff you did. Cygnis insignis 09:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmopolitan - or studiously avoiding claims of bias. The northern hemisphere got a Bauer illustration for one of their icons. Came up nice I reckon. Auer did a bit, but he is no Bauer. The image at nature printing is probably the best of those so-called, better than squashed seaweed and pulling the wings off 50 000 butterflies, Don't-Ya-Know. Ciao! Cygnis insignis 12:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats creepy. Have you seen http://gtools.org/tool/wikipedia-edit-counter/ —Moondyne 13:59, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I confess to having held a degree of perverse pride in being the most prolific W.A. editor. But like the rest of humankind, I find that the most efficient way to maintain a healthy self-image is to adjust my expectations to match my achievements, rather than the other way around. Thus it now matters not that you have a few more Wikipedia edits than me, so long as I remain 6000 edits ahead of you across all the other projects. If I ever overtake you again, it may become important to me again. ;-)

Actually I suspect OIC may be Murali to your Warne.

Yep.

Hesperian 06:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I reckon that about 3000 of mine are AWB driven and they hardly count, so either way you're fairly safe. Which makes it your Warne and not mine. But just like the real one, this Warney has had his best numbers behind him and is heading inevitably and gracefully towards retirement. OIC will take over the mantle I suppose.

Happy Father's Day. —Moondyne 06:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

completely forgot to say so to you both - hope it was a good one - fthers day that is - and editcountitis absent during it - cheers SatuSuro 12:59, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Majesty, it gives me great pleasure to bestow the Triple Crown in recognition of your contributions to Wikipedia. May you wear them well. Durova^Charge! 20:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Hesperian 04:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I've figured out the nature of the award, I must confess that I don't think I meet your criteria. I started The Atlas of Australian Birds, but it was Maias that improved it to GA standard, and the GA pass is a reflection of his efforts, not mine. Hesperian 04:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it up if you pledge to improve an article enough to clear your conscience on that point. Durova^Charge! 04:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got four featured articles, and more on the way, so there's no problems there. If I find myself lying awake at night racked with guilt for accepting an award I don't deserve, I'll let you know. ;-) Thanks again. Hesperian 04:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind I wouldn't qualify for the imperial triple crown jewels because I have only one GA, even though I've got multiples of the others. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 04:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Truth be told, I'm not greatly enamoured of the GA process. Too many times I've seen it end up with the wrong result. I guess that's the risk you take when you place the responsibility for assessment in the hands of a single random volunteer, rather than a consensus of many. I can't in good faith say that I have any plans to take any of my articles through GA. Therefore I shall decline your award, rather than risk devaluing it. Thanks all the same, and I hope my declining hasn't caused offense. Hesperian 05:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lancelot222 has exceeded my realms of power regarding his contributions to Sound masking. He is continuously vandalising the page, ignoring my warnings. I will give him a third warning for another instance of vandalism. Auroranorth 12:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of updating your stats at Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by featured article nominations which was out of date for some reason. It does now get updated by a bot I see, so perhaps the original take-up was faulty. —Moondyne 02:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair call. I'll revert my change as we can't have an article claimed twice and it'd be wrong to diverge from the stated definition of the list. It's just a shame that that Snottygobble fella is no longer around. —Moondyne 05:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issues in Sonoma County are NOT off base, they go diretly to the false statements that the Eucs are being replaced. The Lakeville Eucs are NOT being replaced, they are being eradicated. You should have educated yourself first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.15.51 (talk) 03:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has added links to recovery plans for specific species to appropriate articles, but they need minorly formatted, and the access dates added, something I'm rather bad at, but it might be nice of you to say hi, also. It's mostly spiders and lizards, I think.[2] KP Botany 04:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. KP Botany 03:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you are saying, and you are probably 95% correct. Made me look at web-based sources from a completely different angle. Cheers. Twenty Years 12:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I just alert you to activities on the Hale School Page. I do not wish to get a block. Twenty Years 12:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're the first to ask, so I'm assuming that most people find it makes sense. I don't mind if the idea was to fill it almost immediately, but throwing in redlinks with the supposition that they will evantually be filled is inappropriate because of the very nature of references: they serve to verify the accuracy and credibility of our information. Any wikilink added there should be examined for its relevance even more stringently than any link anywhere else in the article. So it comes to: "they don't help with verifying the article", and also, on the sidelines, attracts stronger, unnecessary attention to the fact the specific article is missing. It's not much different than eliminating self-redirects or red links from "See also", really. Circeus 03:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. The only articles I tend to politely stalk you over are those you extend or create. Feel free to stalk me over to some of my current work, though . Circeus 03:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:ACRA-logo.gif. 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, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. 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 uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 11:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 11:26, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh the humanity. Hesperian 11:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, do you wanna run Banksia prionotes up through FAC next, or finish up Banksia telmatiaea...I've just got Red-tailed Black Cockatoo there at the moment and intend to get Lion there soon but it has a bit of a thorn in its paw...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B.t images I'll have another look this week, last look(1 month ago) I wasnt able to positively ID seedlings but we've had some good weather so maybe, if not I dont think its worth waiting for the images. If you got a minute I like your opinion over on commons about Western Australia. Gnangarra 13:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries. Let's wait another week, and if there's no good photo ops, we'll pull the trigger on Monday 16th. Hesperian 13:47, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you let me know if you have got this image, I happen to have another version in an open tab. I have had no success with obtaining the images from botanicus, or the mirror sites. Learning why is on a list with html->wiki conversion, not in the forseeable. Cygnis insignis 00:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry–I thought I tried everthing. The frame was blank, no amount of fiddling helped. I dragged out firefox and got in straight away, no drama. Forgot to try that bit of kit. I am on another platform, so I thought that was the problem. Having succeeded there, I am able to receive any and all requests. I am taking photo requests as well, let me know if you see something to shoot (specimens in flower, that sort of thing). Cheers, Cygnis insignis 11:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

some seedlings Gnangarra 06:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the best of a bad bunch for the seedlings they've got the fence draped in shade cloth so I couldnt climb to get any closer. Gnangarra 01:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 September, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Stirlingia latifolia, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 10:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please reconsider your vote to delete the article since I do have a copy of the press release at http://www.loopaustralia.com/Director%20Announcement.pdf - it is not hosted on their site (or I oculd not find it) but, that is the media Press release. please reconsider, thanks 203.59.214.40 07:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah - looks interesting, I'm still not crash hot on WA banksias...I'd go with attenuata as per finer leaves, rounder follicles and curly old flower parts (looking at the illustrations in banksia book..). Still, good photo for attenuata page cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing my mistake here. All of the 'extra stuff' that can go before the lead still confuses me. Keep up the good wiki! —ScouterSig 04:06, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK its a challenge - am picking it up and moving with it - so wish me luck - Even if my edits are down for a while - it wont be too much to work on it - also have sent gmail SatuSuro 05:28, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - lets see what happens in real life and wiki life and how it goes :) SatuSuro 08:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shadowing - have spotted some recent ones without project tags - will be off in ten mins - off to the house to readup on the poison/orchid issue - will get back on the gmail about it in a day or so SatuSuro 12:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oggle hits and banksias - nah there are sure to be the earlier described but vanished variety out there somewhere that dont even get onto oggle! Im out! SatuSuro 12:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied on my talk page. I am sorry if I have offended you, and would very much like to edit the bid page together. Auroranorth 10:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a back story?

Nothing exciting. I stumbled on the manuscript after following links from your own Illustrationes Florae Novae Hollandiae and it just piqued a curiosity. A relative had recently told me of a visit to von Martius' Herbarium Martii (National Botanic Garden of Belgium)and it sort of seemed right. —Moondyne 13:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

G'day,

You most probably won't be much interested in this, which is just fine, but still, it doesn't hurt to ask.

If you have a look at Banksia nobilis (still under construction), you'll read that it was first published as Dryandra nobilis by John Lindley in his 1840 A Sketch of the Vegetation of the Swan River Colony.

Go down to the external links section, and you'll see a Wikisource box that will take you straight to Lindley's original formal publication of that species.

From there, click on the footnote number, and you'll be taken to where it is mentioned in the main text.

If you go up a level to Wikisource:Edwards's Botanical Register/Appendix to the First Twenty-three Volumes/A Sketch of the Vegetation of the Swan River Colony, you'll see that I haven't transcribed the entire work - I've done the preamble, the plates, and the section on Proteaceae; but left redlinks for the other sections.

One of the sections is entitled "Stylidiaceae", in which is published the following names: S. leptostachyum, S. scabridum, S. caricifolium, S. saxifragoides, S. striatum, S. bicolor, S. ciliatum, S. hispidum, S. compressum, S. diuroides, S. nudum, S. caulescens, S. pycnostachyum, S. canaliculatum and S. androsaceum.

It occurred to me that you might like the idea of transcribing that section and linking to it from the various Stylidium articles, as I have done for Banksia.

Hesperian 02:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. Beyond en and Commons, I haven't branched out into the other Wikimedia projects. Perhaps today is the day? I'm afraid I don't have a copy of the publication. Where might I get a copy? --Rkitko ^(talk) 17:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Let me know if you find any problems with it. He didn't have much to say about Stylidiaceae, in comparison to Proteaceae. --Rkitko ^(talk) 22:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FYI You gave me a list which included; ... 4102, 4317, 6433 (Something else), 4633 (for 6433?), and 4906 (last). Letting you know, Justin Case. 18:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)~

Gardner and Bennetts have the best hist anedotes about the 1840s tests - was handling the monograph this arvo - great stuff - big problem is the taxonimic debates as to whether the larger grouping as debated presented and written up in 2004 is any better than the 2002 monograph stage of letting in the others - what i love is on my working notes - the way some species have had up to four separate desritptions re-arrangements while the bots muck around with stuff.. heheh - and the general argument to move beyond the bentham 1860 typology - oh well glugg glugg in deep SatuSuro 08:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually if you do have an access to the mono pdf - yes please :) SatuSuro 09:10, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant - one of the probable first 5 gastro arts due - when i decide to do the subsidiary arts - excelento SatuSuro 12:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But davies? I hope that there hasnt be another re-write I dont know about - or perhaps i havent been poring over the piccies with diffs between the one and the other much yet SatuSuro 00:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Hesp whats your opinion is it worth the effort to create this panaroma for use in an article. FYI it has been halved and down sampled to reduce file size. At full size the currnet images create 390meg 8000x1700px at full resolution. Looking at the detail I've gotta re-photograph and increase the number of images available to create as a slight wind makes it impossible to get perfect alignment, but before I do.... Gnangarra 13:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC) File:Grandis1 gnangarra.jpg[reply]

Won't work for subpaged projects like wikibooks, wikisource, or wikiversity just yet (at least without some serious modification to make up for the existence of multiple subpages on multiple projects), but have a look at the interwiki template here. Some of us are hoping to set up the Subject namespace as our default search namespace, but it will probably take at least a year or so to fully index wikibooks (let alone wikisource!). Potential though, eh? --SB_Johnny | ^PA! 12:08, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, eventually that would be nice to have just one template like that for wikipedia articles. The point of the Subject: experiment is to have just one page to link to from other projects that will lead to the various chapters and books (so you don't need 3 boxes for how to cook, grow, and make medicinal use of chamomile, for example). It's a problem for all three of the subpage-enabled projects (wb, wv, and wsource), because unlike wikipedia (or wiktionary, commons, species, etc) they can often have multiple pages in different books or projects for any given topic. --SB_Johnny | ^PA! 14:39, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have one photo from someone's garden I'm not sure whether its victoriae or hookeriana so I'll wirte and check with them, and also ask around. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Stranger and stranger - the images in the article look more like Banksia baxteri..! cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[3] I'm much obliged. —Moondyne 08:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Good idea about the human ecology category. I've been on-and-off attempting to clean up the entire Category:Ecology by moving most of the more-specific articles under it into subcategories. :) Shrumster 05:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For keeping tabs of my tags - I award Hesperian the watchfull eye of my patron saint and the inspiration for the t- shirt caption Heisenberg was probably right knowing full well that certainties of tagging tabs in wikipedia will invariably include escher/godellian knots that probably should not be there but why not? Heisenberg uncertainty principle - being more certain that the certainty insisted by the dark side editors in this project SatuSuro 12:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good call, I had noticed previously but had forgotten, I'll need to fix a few edits that I've just done --Melburnian 03:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me --Melburnian 03:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The English nursery firm of Veitch supplied seed of another Dryandra to Kew in 1893 from which a flowering specimen was included in the magazine in 1898.

I have had a few thoughts on this puzzle. There may be confusion as to which magazine it appeared in, Kew has had a connection to several publctns. For example, "Banksia candolleana Meisn". FloraBase. Western Australian Government Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions. has Hooker's J.Bot.Kew Gard.Misc. 7:118 (1855) [see: J.Bot.] as the citation. This was published while he was editor of Curtis's ~. I have previously been misled by sites that refer to Curtis's as the Kew magazine, I think that is a different publication. I have also read that the brief name change to Curtis's, in the 1980s, was a merge with another Kew Journal. A mixture of ignorance and speculation, but from this I put forward the following proposition:

• The society has given 'patronage' to Curtis's ~, and a second magazine (or journal). An illustration of Kew's specimen, "Dryandra calophylla", appeared in this other journal in 1898.

Hope this helps, but I understand if your reply will begin with "I don't quite know what you mean ..." :-) On a Banksia related matter, where can I post an image for ID? Regards, Cygnis insignis 17:38, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just looking at the article again and noticed, the two images from KP in Taxamony section are the same and the burnt and the seedlings are the same spot at different heights. Gnangarra 01:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. I need to start cracking. Only 3 so far for me :( . Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to do the other one as well SatuSuro 03:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already done. And nuked the vanity article and rolled back the vandalism. Hesperian 03:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ta - discovering that gastro from chandlers list feels like indeed a mountain, but it shall be climbed :) SatuSuro 03:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hesperian...you are one person I would ask this advice from: Do I need a name change? If this article is called Great Walk and its main editor/contributor is also called User:greatwalk, will not the article constantly be plagued with accusations of WP:COI? It seems a likely possibility at this point...--Greatwalk ^Talk 10:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This tool rocks: http://wikidashboard.parc.com/wiki/John_Septimus_Roe Hesperian 04:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know that your edit count is now shown in your preferences screen? It was apparently added quietly about a month ago. —Moondyne 03:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had no idea. The mind boggles. The count functionality (i.e. a database index) went in donkeys' years ago, and then there was a lot of talk that went no-where about how to interface to it. I'm glad it is finally accessible. One nonetheless needs an edit counter in order to access the edit counts of others. Hesperian 04:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

turner of hearts

I held Verticordia: The Turner of Hearts in my hands today, nearly bought it, but then found another book I wanted even more, which was fortunately a third of the price. So what are your plans? Hesperian 11:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was in that same position, I also chose something much less expensive. I don't know I made the right choice, what did you get? I am in temporary possession of a 1st edition, I plan to add the infrageneric clasification, a bit about the taxonomic history, a couple of starts, and a dozen stubs of the frequently seen species. Then I plan to have a cup of tea. Cygnis insignis 11:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Very good idea :| SatuSuro 11:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above text is preserved as an archive of discussions at User talk:Hesperian. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on User talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.