User talk:UtherSRG

This is UtherSRG's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10: 7 days

It is 10:02 PM where this user lives.

zOMG

		zOMG
		I, Hojimachong, hereby award UtherSRG A completely gratuitous zOMG barnstar, for being 110% awesome. Plus 1. --Hojimachong^talk

WikiProject Mammals Notice Board

In line with the recent upgrades to WikiProject Mammals a bulletin board has been created to keep all members up to date with the Project, consider it similar to the Wikipedia Signpost however focused on WikiProject Mammals. I would ask that you add this page to your watchlist in order to get the latest information about WikiProject Mammals. Kind Regards - Zoo Pro and The Arbiter^★_★^★

Happy holidays!

— mw (talk) (contribs) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

So you delete my draft article for no good reason.

User:UtherSRG So you just delete my draft article simply because you can. Edward Myer (talk) 02:13, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not deleted. It is back in Draft:Bruse Wane, and I've submitted it for review for you. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aquilegia truncata / Aquilegia formosa var. truncata

Hi UtherSRG, hope you're well! I've been working on various Aquilegia species and noticed we have an article for A. truncata, where most of the recent edits are yours.

As A. truncata is currently treated as a variety of A. formosa by most authorities (Kew, WFO, Tropicos), I propose moving this to a new page Aquilegia formosa var. truncata, and changing the existing page to a redirect. What do you think?

NB. Generally all the Aquilegia articles (including for the genus itself) have followed Kew's opinion, so this would be the treatment most consistent with previous work. There's already the occasional page for individual varieties e.g. Aquilegia micrantha var. grahamii. But I'm not a botanist, and happy to hear counterarguments.

Jacketpocket (talk) 13:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I may have the most edits on it, but if you look they are all just cleanup-type edits, not content edits. Yes, if the move is in alignment with the rest of the the articles for that genus, then yes, I would support the move. @Plantdrew: is whom I usually defer botany decisions to, so you may want to check with them as well. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I've made the move (my first!). @Plantdrew:, happy to be overruled by you if you see fit.

PS. @UtherSRG the anti-Trump banner made me laugh :) Jacketpocket (talk) 00:12, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacketpocket:, good catch. In general, we're not assuming that varieties and subspecies should have stand-alone articles; they can usually be covered in articles for the species (and we have lots of species stubs that need expansion). Since this article was in decent shape before you worked on it, and you improved it further it's fine to keep it as a stand-alone article. But in the future if you come across a "species" article that isn't accepted as a species, but is accepted as a variety or subspecies, consider just redirecting/merging it to the accepted species (especially consider doing this if it a stub with just a couple sentences). Plantdrew (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Plantdrew, that makes sense, and is what I'd usually do - as you say, it's just because this one was quite fleshed out already that I figured it should stay as a standalone article. Cheers for your help! Jacketpocket (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why??

Why did you delete the information I wrote about the Boiga Dendrophila snake? My edit had more information about the snake? ExZero666 (talk) 10:34, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You supplied no references in your edit. Your formatting was also not in alignment to the rest of the article, nor to other similar articles. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:55, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

The draft article of Daisy Siete series (like Landas in 2006, Tabachingching in 2007 and Tinderella in 2008) is continue to editing thank you 2001:4453:6BD:2000:D6A:3336:F673:EDE3 (talk) 13:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What are you trying to say here? - UtherSRG (talk) 18:20, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your message on my talk page

Thank you for the feedback. I previously edited under the usernames Scorpions13256 and Scorpions1325, but I left because my mental health was making me say and believe things incompatible with being a Wikipedia editor. I returned earlier this month (with permission) after I realized that I was no longer at risk of saying anything dumb or bigoted. Thankfully, I am now back to reality.

If you look at my advanced permissions on my previous accounts, you can see that I was an AFC reviewer, a page mover, a pending changes reviewer, a rollbacker, and an autowikibrowser user. I gave them up when I scrambled the passwords to my account. You can restore them if you'd like, or you can notify WP:AN if you feel uncomfortable. The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 14:09, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Knowledge Pirate: Permissions granted. You'll need to talk to the AFC folks about getting on that list, per the link I previously supplied on your talk page. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:20, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why did I do that?!

I added the text and citation needed for an another user on the talk page who asked if they could do it. To be meta, it wasn't ridiculous. Bearian (talk) 15:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but you should wait for the reference. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Causus rhombeatus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page David Ludwig.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy

Hey there. Can you help me edit the Largest prehistoric animals page in terms of sourcing? There's a few animals I want you to add.

1. Hippopotamus antiquus (The closest ancestral relative to Hippopotamus gorgops)

2. Livyatan melvillei (The largest macroraptorial sperm whale)

And a bonus one: Thalattoarchon saurophagis (The largest and most basal merriamosaurid ichthyosaur)

I mean no harm, and I'm new here. Lucasblakeman0 (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucasblakeman0: Please read WP:REFB. I reverted your changes because they were unsourced. You can add the material back if you can appropriately cite sources that meet WP:SIRS. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I am starting to do that, along with fixing grammar errors, too. Also, when it comes to sourcing for WikiPedia, I'm a novice with it. Lucasblakeman0 (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to become good at it. We are nothing as editors without references. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:04, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Well, I did it right. Go see for yourself. Plus, Thalattoarchon, H. antiquus and Livyatan should stay, too. They're also giants, too. Lucasblakeman0 (talk) 21:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Good job! I've provided some additional helpful links on your talk page. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Also, can we add Cynognathus to the fray? I mean, it is technically the largest member of its clade, the Cynognathia. And also, can Tusoteuthis and Enchoteuthis of the Enchoteuthinae subfamily be added, too? Lucasblakeman0 (talk) 03:02, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]