User talk:Styrphid Fox

Sericomyia carolinensis, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Gpkp [u • t • c] 15:38, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Styrphid Fox! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Ost (talk) 19:02, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Ost316. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Volucella evecta. Please do not do this. Blank pages are harmful to Wikipedia because they have a tendency to confuse readers. As a rule, if you discover a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If a page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you wish to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Ost (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions. It seems that you may have added public domain content to one or more Wikipedia articles, such as Palpada agrorum. You are welcome to import appropriate public domain content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia guideline on plagiarism, such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, including the usage of an attribution template. Please make sure that any public domain content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. There are about 500 pages (perhaps 50 already in the works) similar to this that I plan to edit, and in some cases create. Unfortunately much of the information, by nature, is in the public domain as the original descriptions and sometimes only description of an insect species fall before copyright. I can easily add the information you request. I reformat nearly all the work from sources to make the text more readable, i.e. complete sentences conjunctions. There are times when I conflate two or more works and simply footnote at the end of a paragraph or section. Perhaps 90% of my reference material comes through the Biodiversity Heritage Library, and i believe they do provide information on the copyright status of their information, so doing a trace back should be not too hard. Thanks again for doing what you do. From years of experience, I know most people take criticism badly. Styrphid Fox (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, sorry for not replying sooner. It's actually easy to add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done so for Brachyopa diversa. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 16:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Styrphid Fox

Thank you for creating Anasimyia chrysostoma.

User:Pppery, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

See my edits to the page for some general advice on how to format articles on species.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Pppery}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:48, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Platycheirus scamboides, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ––FormalDude talk 01:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, I have added three references to the two. One is a journal article with the original description, another is a masters thesis, and the third is the standard online source for basic taxonomic info. I resubmitted that article for review and will be working on the other article you flagged today. Styrphid Fox (talk) 13:24, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Platycheirus normae, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ––FormalDude talk 01:50, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Platycheirus normae, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Curbon7 (talk) 05:56, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Platycheirus scamboides, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

RPSkokie (talk) 13:35, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Styrphid Fox,

Thank you for creating List of syrphids in Minnesota.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Hello, are the links in 'Also see' actually references? If so, please make them inline citations and then move back to mainspace. If not, please add your sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 15:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I could easily do as you suggest. With nearly all species linked to their own pages it seemed redundant to provide a reference for each one so i went with the general references at the bottom of the article. I checked with other lists of species on wikipedia and it is a mixed bag concerning references but i think you are right. I have previously made a list of the New York species with around 90 references and it seemed to be too much information. I am currently working on another state list of species and will definitely take the reference requirement into account. Keep up the good work. Perhaps the more thankless job than writing articles is reviewing them. Styrphid Fox (talk) 16:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, List of syrphids in Minnesota, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 15:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Styrphid Fox. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of syrphids in Minnesota, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Styrphid Fox. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "List of syrphids in Minnesota".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:04, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]