Encyclopedia > User talk:Jimfbleak

  Article Content

User talk:Jimfbleak

Hi Jim, I just realised, that there is a † next to many scientific bird names (e.g. Great northern diver). Can you tell me the reason for that? For me it reads, as if it is an extinct species (what is certainly not intended). Excuse me, if this is a question already discussed. Usually I am not active in the bird articles, so I may have missed this. BTW, you and Tannin and others are really doing great work - I like all these new bird and mammal articles, which have improved Wikipedia a lot. -- Cordyph 14:52 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Perhaps you should think about replacing the dagger with an asterisk or another character? -- Cordyph 15:21 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Eeek! As if Swaros aren't dear enough already! I'm not married (lucky for me in this case) but my #1 friend and my mother have both expressed considerable concern at how much I just spent. (Ha - well into my 40s and I still need mothering, it seems.) No matter: I have assured them that I won't be spending any more anytime soon - which is absolutely 100% true, as there isn't any more. I tried the scope out on the weekend, and think it is worth every penny. Even my penny-pinching #1 friend is warming to it. No great shots yet (it's mid-winter, which means not many birds about and poor light much of the time) but I've got a few that are half decent, including the Red-rumped Parrot which was hand-held out the car window, me holding the scope with both hands and Belinda pressing the shutter release! Given that it was taken with a 40th of a second shutter speed I'm happy with that one. I expect to get in lots more practice over winter, and hope to be proficient with it by the time spring brings more birds and longer, better-lit days. --T

I'm not a saint, I'm just bored. Well, unless the 2 are the same thing. :-) Evercat 16:41 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Wow, Jim. You're fast! I entered by first ever Wiki page about the Jabiluka Uranium mine. I edit it to add Wiki links, press save, and lo and behold, you've already put the links in.

Dear Jim-

Thank you for your valuable comments. I need them as I am still learning.

I hope I am doing better, and if so it is only because of your guidance. If you could spare some time for the next few days to watch my entries, I would be very appreciative.

It is a convention in the military world to use CAPITALS for operational codenames. In the absense of a convention, I am betwixt and between. A reader should know the proper way to do it (in caps) but it is quite annoying to those who are not amongst the intiated.

I welcome your thoughts on this.

Now, with three tildes...


Hi Jim, Thanks so much for your comments. I really appreciated it. I have felt so frustrated on wiki of late. I was very very angry last night. Maybe I will stay, but if I do I will be doing a lot less editing, at least for the moment. But thank you for the comments, they really cheered me up. lol. FearÉIREANN 18:50 25 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hi, I added the 19th century cut to Condor, honestly, because it was on the same page as something else I wanted to scan. I thought the illo added to the article, but birds are not my field, so if you think it should be deleted or replaced, go ahead. Regarding format, I thought I'd read somewhere that Wikipedia prefered png for diagrams; I can put the scans into jpg or png format with equal ease. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 05:46 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)


Well, I thought my post on Operation Tinderbox was first-rate, but your 'bolding' and italics added a lot. Now if I can only figure out how to do it myself.

'Got it!'

Now, with three tildies … PaulinSaudi

Hi Jim! Yes, I got quite a few good images at Slimbridge but I don't have any bird books so I have no idea which countries they all come from, I should have noted the details down off the notice boards.

I live about 30 miles from Slimbridge so I'll go again soon. I was amused to find Wikipedia had articles on the Greater, Chilean and Caribbean flamingo but I photographed the Andean and Lesser!! Here's the list of my photos from last Sunday .....

Andean and Lesser Flamingo, Andean Goose, Bahama Pintail, Bean Goose, Black Swan, Cape Teal, Common Shelduck, Coot, Moorhen, Coreopsis, Emperor Goose, Lesser Snowgoose, Mute Swan, Whistling Swan, NeNe, Red-billed Whistling Duck, Red-breasted Goose, White-faced Whistling Duck, White-fronted Goose, White-headed Duck.

I also have indifferent pics (because the duck was too far away and I don't have a telephoto) of Barrow's Goldeneye and Australian Shelduck, but they would be usable until a better pic comes along. Identification was a bit tricky because I only have a little leaflet from Slimbridge. Nevertheless, I'm confident on my identifications. Why do some ducks have whistling in their name, I wonder. Perhaps it's the noise they make.

I'll look around later today to see if any of these are already written about. It's really nice to have a purpose to the pics I take, instead of just putting them in an album ot letting them sit on my hard drive. Best Wishes,
Adrian Pingstone 12:24 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yeah. How did I get started on porcupines? Did I see a small edit you made this morning and carry on from there? I think that was it. I hadn't twigged that that text was the 1911 stuff - I should have, the style is hard to miss. No matter: it's like tidying up my desk at the office: there is so much that needs doing in the mammals that I can start anywhere at all and be sure that it will reqire some sort of action. And, just as with the paperwork spilling off my desk, I have the habit of getting ,y teeth into something and then, the moment I see something shiny, forgetting all about it and starting again somewhere else. :) Species are easy: my big Oxford mammal book is wonderful. Pictures, though, I don't have, and not even my wonderful new lens will let me take snaps of an African Porcupine from here! -- T

That's what we call an illistration, not a cartoon. So, what exactly was your problem with it? MB 18:21 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Jim, Thanks for your list of ducks and geese. I started by uploading bean.goose.250pix.jpg and bean.goose.600pix.jpg.
Then I tried putting the 250pix one into the taxobox with a "Larger Version" notice for the big one. This didn't display properly but then I really messed up by accidentally pressing the Save page button. In trying to correct the mess I got into a real tangle. So to get back to the proper layout I've reverted back to Tony's last edit. So all is back as normal.
The question I should have asked in the first place is .....
Do I put the pic in the taxobox and "throw away" the drawing,
or do I put the pic in the article (but there's no obvious place for it),
or do I just make a link to it (such as "Here is another picture" sort of thing (but better wording than that!).
Your help, please. It's best to get this sorted out right at the start.
Adrian Pingstone 18:39 26 Jun 2003 (UTC)

You must have missed the smiley. No offence was taken, I was just joking. Don't call it laziness, because I edit offline all the time and no doubt I would have done the same thing. -- Tim Starling 00:30 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I completely support you on the removal of that nonsense "finch" pic. Is Mbecker a troublemaker?
Adrian Pingstone 10:00 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Sorry, I think I managed to blank the Black Swan page while working on it (it's OK now). So far I've done Bean Goose and Black Swan pics.
Adrian Pingstone 12:43 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Jim-- Can you spare a minute to look at my table on Operation Plowshare? It has a few format problems I cannot (yet) fix myself. Should only take you a minute.

Thanks, Now, with three tildies … PaulinSaudi

Nope. You are, in my view, acting quite correctly in finch. The cartoon birdy really isn't appropriate to an encyclopedia written for adults. There is nothing at all wrong with that drawing, I hasten to add, it's simply that it's inappropriate in that entry. Tannin

I am not a "troublemaker." Have a look at my 1900+ contributions (/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mbecker&limit=50000&offset=0) if you need convincing. The fact is, no real explanation was given for the removal beside that you didn't like my illustration. You jumped to the conclusion that it was a "cartoon" or "parody." I find this insulting. There was no good reason to remove an illustration that is perfect for that article (it's a woodpecker finch, look at the image description!). I don't know what you have against people contributing original works, but it seems to be the consensus that my illustrations are not wanted in the bird pages. MB 14:37 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
The illustration at Skua doesn't appear to be a drawing to me. It looks like a photograph, or a photograph that has been digitally edited slightly to make it look like a drawing. MB 15:03 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I wasn't implying that it was a copyright photo. Jumping to conclusions again. Anyhow, the link to the source of the image is broken. You should consider updating to aviod future confusion. MB 15:25 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem with the link at :Image:Pomarineskua86.JPG was that it was spelled incorrectly. It had an extra y in it. It's fixed now. MB 16:51 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Jim, have a look at Talk:Finch where I hope I've finished the argument.
Adrian Pingstone 16:54 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Grr... deleting Sue's talk page makes it slightly more difficult for me to gather evidence. ;) --Dante Alighieri 18:26 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No no, keep it up. I was just being silly. Delete away! --Dante Alighieri 18:31 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, there definitely seem to be some issues with heading size. I, for one, can't really tell the difference between the different-level headings in Mozilla. That's mostly an issue of tweaking the style sheets, though. I will see if I can find out how to do that. Thanks for the suggestion! -- Wapcaplet 21:17 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I just checked some of the different style preferences. It looks like if you use the "Cologne blue" style in your user preferences, the headings look quite a bit better (though it changes the appearance of everything). The standard heading sizes are only very slightly different -- only about 3% difference in size between some of them! I think maybe Brion can update them if we ask. I will leave him a message. -- Wapcaplet 21:27 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Jim, I've got a pic of a pair of Lesser Snow Geese but can it be used in the Snow Goose article or shall I park it among the Snow Goose text for the moment? Is this the variant Snow Goose that the text mentions as not being all white? What do I do? Here it is ......

Thanks. Adrian Pingstone 22:31 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
OK, the Snow Goose is now in the taxobox but, just to confuse you, it's not the pic above. In my near total ignorance of birds (my passion is aircraft) I had thought that the white goose in the background of my taxobox pic was a farmyard goose put in to raise the goslings that were running around. Then I realised it was another Snow Goose (I think, but I can't be sure because it's facing away and the back feathers are overexposed). Anyway, I'm nearly sure it is a white variant Snow Goose. If you are doubtful, I can use the pic above instead.

One point: Can you add a bit saying that the Snow Goose is a covering name for the three types: Ross', Lesser and Greater? Or else the article title and my taxobox heading don't agree, which will puzzle the reader.
Adrian Pingstone 09:57 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Tundra Swan added, but I have a comment. The Bewick's Swan pic is too large so I've moved it down to the very bottom of the article. That can be corrected another time.
Adrian Pingstone 13:39 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Just wanted to tell you that, although I've added Red-breasted Goose I'm not happy with the pic because the bird had it's face turned away from me on all four shots I took of it! I'll replace it with a better one when I go to Slimbridge next.
Adrian Pingstone 20:43 29 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Good evening Jim. It's time I added another species account, I didn't do one yesterday. Not sure which one yet, I usually just flip through until I see a gap that strikes me as a good idea at the time. Do you mind if I have a tinker with the species listing at stork to make it consitent in layout? Also, did you see my Hardhead entry? I was really pleased with that shot. It's not actually very represemtative of that small, meek and mild species, but it was too hard to resist. :) Tannin

Sri Lanka! Whoohoo! That is, from all I hear, one of the great birding destinations. You will love it. Nice to see that your productivity is as high as ever. Obviously, the rewiring job didn't keep you off the air for too long. -- T

Thanks for the tip on Bucky, Jason

When you get a moment, Jim, see Talk:European Starling. No hurry. -- T

Just wondering, I noticed you mention pictures of a woodpecker finch on User talk:Arpingstone. Were you refering the copyrighted pictures (that should never had been uploaded)? If not, could you point me to them? MB 21:30 30 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Well, I thought you had said you were going to make an article about woodpecker finches because he had uploaded some images? I thought maybe you were refering to images we could legally use. I was wondering if we had some images we could legally use, because I was interested in looking at them if we did. MB 13:48 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hi Jim: BSN stands for Baloncesto Superior Nacional or National Superior Basketball (league) in Puerto Rico. Click on the article and see. NBA is National Basketball Association in the USA, the most famous of all world basketball leagues, I think.

Thanks for reading the Ramon Ramos article and God bless you!

Sincerely yours; Antonio Almost Famous Martin

Don't think I am criticizing or anything. But don't you think that Kingsley Shacklebolt entry actually technically qualified as a stub? I won't miss it, that's for sure. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 06:32 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Don't sweat it too much. School story was also a cursory Harry Potter reference, and I won't lose any sleep over deleting it either. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 06:50 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've just added a pic to Tadorninae. My Slimbridge sheet says it's a Common Shelduck but the Wikipedia article says just Shelduck. Probably the same bird but I thought I'd check with you.

Adrian Pingstone 18:16 2 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Jim, have a look at the Village Pump, please. I'd love to identify that bird. If it would be too much work to go through your books, don't worry. I can send a print to Slimbridge and they'll know. Thanks.
Adrian Pingstone 08:05 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've been, as we say here, flat out like a lizzard drinking Jim. But I'll run an editorial eye over those layouts as you suggest. Sort of restful, not-too-much-thinking task that I feel best suited to tonight ... actual creative editing is probably a little more than I am up to. Tannin

I've been meaning to write up the Plains Wanderer for quite some time anyway, Jim. It's one of those unusual, not-really-related-to-anything-else birds that you pretty much have to write up, like the Malleefowl, the Freckled Duck, and the Magpie Goose[?]. But not tonight 'cause I'm bushed. Leave it be and I'll get onto it. --T

PS. I see that HANZAB has gone with Sibley & Alquhist on this and regards the button-quails as Turniciformes. Would you prefer to (a) leave them in Galliformes, (b) switch them to Turniciformes, or (c) wait till I'm alert enough to read up on and summarise the arguments before deciding?

I can't believe there was an article on the one and only bird (Orange-headed Thrush) I managed to catch still enough to photograph in the tropical house. Done without a telephoto because I don't have one. It's now on the article. Thanks for the identification.
Adrian Pingstone 13:55 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
We normally keep copyright violation warnings in place for a week, why did you delete them immediately? -- JeLuF 19:10 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I don't think Tesskrose is a vandal in the sense of "harming the project on purpose". It might be that Tesskrose didn't notice the "you have messages". After finding the copyright notice and changing the article once, Tesskrose stopped contributing, so I think Tesskrose has realized his/her fault. -- JeLuF 19:21 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)

OK, I'll take care of buttonquail - unless you get there first! Actually, I assumed that Adrian's bird was a UK species, so I threw you a curlier ball than I knew! I thought it looked like some kind of thrush and almost said so, but ran out of courage and kept quiet. I'm about to cross out the egret redrect and replace it with a stub, BTW, mainly so as to have an excuse to add a picture to it. Tannin

PS: I don't know anything about egrets bar the Australian ones, so feel free to leap in and add stuff or correct any Australocentric assumptions I make. Tannin

Egrets confuse me. I am so used to endemics that I think I have an underlying assumption that goes like this: If (a) I have seen one, and (b) it isn't an imported pest, and (c) it isn't in a cage, then (d) it doesn't exist outside of Australia - i.e., I can take local taxonomy as gospel.

On the ID, you are quite right, of course. I don't know my egrets (or indeed any of the water birds to speak of) and picked that out of a field guide, crossing my columns over no doubt. That leaves the question open then - Great or Intermediate? I'll see if one of my other shots gets close enough ... Hmmmm ... this (http://www.redhill.net.au/wiki/whichegret.jpg) suggests the Great according to my reading (it's a shot of the same bird) - but maybe you better just wade into egret and sort out my mess as best you can. The water there is a little too deep for me! :( --T

I'm getting very little spare time this week, Jim, so my Wiki hours budget is suffering. But that's no excuse for not spotting this: the "Chinese Egret", Egretta eulophotes and "Swinhoe's Egret", Ardea eulophotes are the same species. It seems that both the common name and the genus have been switched about. HANZAB seems to be out on a limb with this one, everyone else calls it the Chinese Egret. I assume that the rationale for HANZAB's change is that it's silly to call a bird "Chinese" when it's also found in lots of other countries - Japan, Korea, & etc.

Today was a perfect winter's day: sun out 90% of the time, some wind but not enough to give me camera shake. So I spent the whole day taking photos. I got multiple good, clear, close-up shots of Pacific Black Duck, Hoary-headed Grebe, Pink-eared Duck, Dusky Moorhen, Coot, White-winged Chough, Scarlet Robin, White-winged Triller, and New Holland Honeyeater. I was just a fraction too slow to get pictures of a Goldfinch and a magnificent Brown Falcon that sat calmly in a dead tree and watched me stop the car, get out, open the boot, extract my gear, set up the tripod, aim and focus, then - as I reached for the shutter release - flew off. No matter. A very productive day.

When I got home, to my intense fury, I discovered that every single one of my 437 photographs is hopelessly out of focus. (Beat head against wall, tear hair out, hit self with 10 pound hammer.) I used the exact same method that I have had success with on previous outings - my Great Egret in flight, for example. Obviously, I have set the camera slightly differently somewhere along the line, because the scope was perfectly focussed - I spent quite a while just looking through it and enjoying the birds. Bloody Nikon. Their optics are superb, but their ergonomic design skills are very poor. And now I can't find the damn manual! So I went to their web site and - astonishingly - they don't seem to have a PDF of the manual available for download so that I can print one out. Even the cheapest and nastiest computer motherboard had a ownloadable copy of the manual online.

Anyway, in a fit of pique, I have cancelled tommorow's appointments, and plan to retrace me steps of yesterday, with scope and camera in hand once more, and reshoot the whole bloody lot. But first, I need to work out why the damn Nikon is messing up 100% of its shots. Tannin 13:38 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hi Jim, the Motmot picture is from the German wikipedia; from time to time I am visiting the other language wikipedias to have a look at the image lists. New photos from there are now in the motmot article, in cardinal (bird) and Black-headed Gull. (You might want to check these articles.) -- Cordyph 16:55 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I've just looked at Motmot and saw that the bird could be found in the New World. No help to me! I don't know what the New World is exactly (I thought it was just North America). It probably shouldn't be necessary to use a link to find this lovely bird's home.Thanks from Adrian.
Adrian Pingstone 18:51 5 Jul 2003 (UTC)

All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License

  Search Encyclopedia

Search over one million articles, find something about almost anything!
  Featured Article
Indian reservation

... Indian Reservation[?] Fort Yuma Indian Reservation[?] Cocopah Indian Reservation[?] San Xavier Indian Reservation[?] Tohono O'Odham Nation[?] Brighton Indian ...

This page was created in 26.8 ms