Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cetaceans

message: nominated Killer Whale for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 19:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Killer Whale - featured article review 

message: I was going to make the official proposal myself, but it seems like the sort of thing that would be more skillfully discussed and handled by Team Cetacea (of which I am a fan but not a member). Krychek (talk) 20:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree: Since the term "whale", by usage, applies only to part of the order Cetacea, and has distinct biological differences from dolphins & porpoises, especially in the case of baleen whales, I recommend that they not be merged. AshLin (talk) 13:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that partial usage is so cut-and-dried or universal to justify the current state of affairs.  I'd like them both to be merged to Whale (Cetacea should be a redirect, I think.) ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 17:53, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[Whale]] and [[Cetacea]]? 

message: As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs. 
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages tool update 

message: Whale feces is up. Any chance of an image of whale poo? AshLin (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whale poo 

message: ... where angels fear to tread? I've begun work on Cetacean anatomy. I intend to try my best to bring in a much needed resource for our project. The whale & dolphin anatomies sections are clearly inadequate. I'm modelling the draft on fish anatomy. My draft is here. Since I'm a Wikitroll, please don't expect quick results but I hoe to get there eventually. I've done something similar in the past so hope to succeed here also. AshLin (talk) 13:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fools rush in... 

message: Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the WikiProject X proposal 

message: Hi All,
I am the Education Committee Chair for the Society for Marine Mammalogy, we are hosting a "WikiSprint" which is a week long editathon starting on January 19th for all articles related to marine mammals. Please considering enrolling on our WikiEducation Course Page 
ShaneGero (talk) 09:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marine Mammal WikiSprint - editathon 

message: Hello everyone!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject X is live! 

message: Hi, 
I am trying to correct the taxonomy template for cetaceans. Template:Taxonomy/Cetacea/Mammalia. The Order for all cetaceans should be Cetartiodactyla Not Cetacea (which should be unranked based on current understanding); and Odontoceti and Mysticeti, which were previously suborder should be unranked. The old system should always be visible as unranked, since this is a major change in taxonomy compared to current public knowledge. I have managed to make Cetacea and the two suborders unranked in the template, but it will not allow me to make an new entry for the Order which should be Cetartiodactyla. Does anyone here have experience with the Template:Taxonomy/Cetacea/Mammalia system and who understands the classification changes I am proposing below. THANKS ShaneGero (talk) 12:54, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy template for auto taxobox - Order Cetartiodactlya 

message: I have nominated the Whale article for FA candidate. Please join the discussion on whether or not this article meets FA criteria at this link. Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 02:19, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whale - FA candidate 

message: Hello, I've nominated River dolphin for GAN. Please start the review at this link. Many thanks. Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 21:27, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  River dolphin - GAN 

message: I have nominated List of cetaceans for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. sst✈discuss 18:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  FLRC 

message: I've nominated Porpoise for GA-review. Please start the review at this link. Many thanks Dunkleosteus77 (push to talk) 20:09, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Porpoise – GAN 

message: I'm putting together an extensive rewrite for the Baleen whale article in my sandbox. Below is what I have so far, feel free to make whatever changes you feel necessary. Thanks   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been up for a week, so I'll go ahead and add it.   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  04:07, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baleen whale rewrite  

message: I've nominated Baleen whale for GA-review. Please start the review at this link. Many thanks   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baleen whale – GAN 

message: Bottlenose dolphin, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: GAR

message: I revised the Pygmy killer whale and was hoping to upgrade its class from "start" to at least "C". Could the article be reassessed and have its class upgraded?
--LiaElf76 (talk) 21:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Pygmy killer whale

message: Feel free to participate in a discussion I started at Talk:Even-toed ungulate#Taxoboxes for even-toed ungulates and whales. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:46, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxoboxes for even-toed ungulates and whales 

message: Hi guys, I assessed the 2 listed unassessed articles that were listed as needed doing yesterday, but as yet the article box on the project home page hasn't updated to show this. Can someone check if I've inserted the code correctly on the article's talk pages as it's the first article assessment I've done? The articles in question are mud ring feeding and Dolfinarium Harderwijk. Cheers guys. douts (talk) 17:49, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment query 

message: Greetings  Members!
This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the  that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:
* Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report
If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.
Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.
Thank you for your consideration.  Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.
Best regards,  — Delivered: 17:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: 2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

message: T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 10:29, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''[[v:WikiJournal of Science|WikiJournal of Science]]'' promotion 

message: Sei-lwhales talk section has a lot of crossed over text. Have an historical edit section to keep such.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.75.121.81 (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep the scraps

message: We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month,  will post at /Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of .
 
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
* The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
* The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
* The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to  for his original , and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of , and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular pages report 

message: I came across Whales in Ghanaian waters and am wondering if such formulations exist elsewhere: "Birds of X islands" or "Fish of Y lake". Or whether it is worth creating "Whales (or cetaceans) of Z waters". Carbon Caryatid (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: it looks like that article was specifically created because of some stranding event   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:41, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

text: We have some "Fauna of place X" and "Mammals of place X" articles, e.g. Fauna of Australia. And we have :Category:Lists of mammals by location. For waters rich in cetacean life it would be appropriate to have an article about the cetaceans in the area. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 18:22, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: most whales are in every ocean, any particular body of water you suggest?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting scope of article 

message: There's currently discussion at Talk:Cryptid whale likely of interest to readers here. :bloodofox: (talk) 21:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion at Cryptid Whale 

message: The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.
Portals are being redesigned.
The new design features are being applied to existing portals.
At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template .
The discussion about this can be found here.
Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass.  Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.
=== Background ===
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject collaboration notice from the [[WP:WPPORT|Portals WikiProject]] 

message: On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace.  On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.
There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.
Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.
So far, 84 editors have joined.
If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.
If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.
Thank you.     — The Transhumanist    07:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: There is an RfC regarding recommending usage of automatic taxoboxes at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Request for comments: Should the automatic taxobox system be the current recommended practice?. Inviting anybody who watches this page to contribute their thoughts to that thread. 
WikiProject Cetaceans is currently using automatic taxoboxes in 98.6% of project tagged articles that have any form of taxobox. Plantdrew (talk) 01:37, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment on recommending usage of automatic taxoboxes 

message: There are only two articles in WikiProject Cetaceans that use manual es:  Bryde's whale and Minke whale.  Both are cramming two species into taxoboxes meant for one taxon each.  Are both/either of these whales species complexes, or some other infrageneric clades?  If so, the manual es should be upgraded to es.  If they are only evolutionary grades, then an automated  box should be used.  I think either change could be applied without rocking the boat on the rest of the article.
I have raised this on Talk:Bryde's whale#Is it a grade or a clade? and Talk:Minke whale#Are Minke whale even a taxon or an informal grouping?, but thought I should ping here to loop in more folks.  I posted separately also in case the answers are different for each article.  --Nessie (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two for one for Bryde's whale and Minke whale? 

message: A discussion is taking place as to whether :Portal:Cetaceans 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:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Pigs (it's a bundled nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 02:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomination of [[:Portal:Cetaceans]] for deletion 

message: A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
:– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new newsletter directory is out! 

message: Despite the many Wikipedians who edit content related to organisms/species, there hasn't been a Tree of Life Newsletter...until now! If you would like regular deliveries of said newsletter, please add your name to the subscribers list. Thanks, Enwebb (talk) 00:29, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Subscribe to new Tree of Life Newsletter!

message: I have nominated List of cetacean species for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.  Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  FLRC 

message: Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for information on WP1.0 web tool 

message: After all the fun with the Spooky Species Contest last month, there's a new contest for the (Northern hemisphere's) Winter holidays at Wikipedia:WikiProject Tree of Life/Contest.    It's not just Christmas, but anything festive from December-ish.  Feel free to add some ideas to the Festive taxa list and enter early and often. --Nessie (talk) 18:52, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  First annual Tree of Life Decemberween contest 

message: Introducing Template:The Cetacean Barnstar Jerm (talk) 23:39, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Cetacean Barnstar 

message: If one would like it one could look at a question I've posted on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. Thank You anyway. Эйхер (talk) 14:58, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Sperm whale has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 11:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Reassessment 

message: I have nominated Sei whale for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 02:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for Sei whale 

message: I have nominated Fin whale for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. OnlyFixingProse (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAR for Fin whale 

message: I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
*John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
* John Smith "" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from ,  and .
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
-  Headbomb {t · c · p · b}
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  User script to detect unreliable sources 

message: There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mesonychid#Requested move 11 October 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 18:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move at [[Talk:Mesonychid#Requested move 11 October 2023]] 

message: Just checking in to see if anyone else here is still active? I've been working on extinct cetacean articles, but it seems like the project page and other areas here can do with some proper maintenance. Please drop a reply if you're still active? Thanks! The Morrison Man (talk) 15:56, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Activity check