Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Primates/Archive 1

message: Thanks for the online taxonomy, Pete! That's sure a help, although it contradicts Tudge. Hrm. It also doesn't give grade rankings. Well, it's still nicely useful. :) - UtherSRG 13:15, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pretty sure that taxonomic list I added is the same one that Colin Groves gives in his book "Primate Taxonomy" published Smithsonian Institute Press, 2002. That book itself had its roots, I think, in the workshop "Primate taxonomy for the new millennium" (see Google). There is also this webpage - http://members.tripod.com/cacajao/taxonomy.html - that gives five more classifications dating from 1972 - 1999 to genus only. I don't have Tudge so don't know what format he uses. Cetaceans wasn't as hard as this!  - that order has a dominant classification (Rice 1998) that I used and I mentioned the other classifications in passing in individual species articles where appropiate. Over to you.. way out of my depth away from whales! Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 13:54, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

text: Yeah, I gave the Google a bit of a run out too :-). You changed the references to include Groves and had to include "presumably", because we aren't yet certain that the list we link to is Groves' list. Well if you change the .html to .txt in that link so that you get http://www.primate.wisc.edu/pin/amnattax.txt the page lists Groves as the source (though doesn't explictly mention the book).. so that reduces the uncertainty a little bit. I've written an email to the librarians that run that website to see if they can confirm for us. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 14:55, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy lists 

message: Ok. I'm at a loss on how to deal with ths mess. Lemurs are all 4 families of critters, Lemuridae is one of those families, and Lemur is a genus of Lemuridae. Since Lemur only has one species, Lemur and Ringtailed Lemur will be one article anyway. Ah. I'm stating to solve my own problem. Lemur should talk about the critters in general, Lemuridae about the family, and Ring-Tailed Lemur about the genus and species. Ok. I'll shutup now. - UtherSRG 04:00, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lemurs, Lemuridae, ''Lemur'' 

message: Ok... I've finally gotten a copy of Groves. You're right, it should be used as the basis. Here's what his classification looks like:
* Superfamily Platyrrhini
** Family Cebidae: 
*** Subfamily Hapalinae: (was Callitrichinae)
**** Genus Callithrix
***** Subgenus Callithrix
***** Subgenus Mico
***** Subgenus Cebuella  (was a Genus)
**** Genus Leontopithecus
**** Genus Saguinus
**** Genus Callimico
*** Subfamily Cebinae:
**** Genus Cebus
*** Subfamily Chrysotrichinae: (syn Saimirinae)
**** Genus Saimiri
** Family Nyctipithecidae: (syn Aotidae)
*** Genus Aotus
** Family Pitheciidae:
*** Subfamily Pithecinae:
**** Genus Pithecia
**** Genus Chiropotes
**** Genus Cacajao
*** Subfamily Callicebinae:
**** Genus Callicebus
** Family Atelidae: 
*** Subfamily Mycetinae: (syn Alouatinae)
**** Genus Alouatta
*** Subfamily Atelinae:
**** Genus Ateles
**** Genus Brachyteles
**** Genus Lagothrix
**** Genus Oreonax
I'll be updating the pages, and then checking the ret of the Primates against Groves. - UtherSRG 20:54, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Groves

message: In several pages (eg, New World monkeys, Howler monkey, it seems to imply that ALL platyrrhines have prehensile tails.  From what I've been able to find out, this is not the case.  As far as I'm aware capuchins don't have prehensile tails, squirrel monkeys have them only in infancy, and only some howlers have them.  What's the deal? :)--Mishac 18:15, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prehensile tails 

message: There's a couple of paragraphs on this added by Kenneth Alan (check the page history) which I suspect are highly speculative, and should perhaps be removed - have already done so with a bit that was even worse myself, but I don't know enough of the subject to be 100% certain they're wrong (this user has a history of adding his nonsensical ideas to numerous pages; see the entries about him in Vandalism in progress). - MPF 13:38, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken a rough stab at undoing his garbage. - UtherSRG 14:32, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Neanderthal]]

message: Well folks, the time has come to build taxobox templates. Is there a clue somewhere to teach us all the bells and whistles of MW 1.3 templates? - UtherSRG 20:23, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Hrm... meant to put this on Tree of Life. I'll move it there. :) - UtherSRG 20:55, 29 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: MW 1.3 taxobox templates

message: Please check out the discussion and poll on Talk:Chimpanzee - UtherSRG 02:22, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Chimpanzee

message: Several articles discuss changes in hominoid taxonomy, not all agreeing, so I wrote a section on it at Hominoidea#History of hominoid taxonomy to which the other articles can link for the full story. I haven't been able to find anything about the early history of hominoid taxonomy; it would also be nice to know who proposed each change, and roughly when (if) it became widely accepted. Gdr 21:35, 2004 Aug 31 (UTC)
:Fantastic job, Gdr! - UtherSRG 21:24, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made some copyedits. - UtherSRG 21:32, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hominoid taxonomy 

message: Please see my comments about splitting prosimian into two articles on talk:prosimian. - UtherSRG 15:45, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that's done. So is the merger of ape and Hominoidea. - UtherSRG 21:31, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prosimian vs Strepsirrhini 

message: My Anthropology class notes are showing that Homo habilis existed from 1.9 to 1.6 MYA, however this website shows H. habilis living between 2.4 and 1.75 MYA. Wikipedia states that they existed 2.5 to 2.0 MYA. What the heck is going on here? Dustin Asby 00:43, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Human_evolution doesn't even agree with itself, it lists "2.4 to 1.5" MYA and "2.5–2 MYA." It also says, "when it diverged from the Australopithecines." I think there is considerable evidence that Homo diverged at garhi. Dustin Asby 01:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Homo habilis'' dates

message: When multiple sources disagree about the status of a species, what source should we assume is correct? -KalevTait 16:52, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: IUCN's http://www.redlist.org should be our primary source for conservation status, since that's where the conservation status article says we get our data from. - UtherSRG 03:03, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should use MSW 3rd edition (I have the Primates list). However, it's two years out of date, Groves said. The status of northern South American Aotus has been changed. Ucucha See Mammal Taxonomy 05:39, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status of Primates 

message: I left a note on the Homo erectus talk page regarding the use of fire.  Would appreciate a response.  I think a revision of the sentence in question might be in order.  Thanks.  WBardwin 04:03, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Homo erectus'' 

message: Ok, So I'm starting to look at the early hominids category, to try to clean it up. I'm going to use this space as scratch space or thinking out loud space. Feel free to chime in or edit at will. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  category re-work 

message: I went to the Paranthropus article specifically to see why Wikipedia members chose to title it P rather than A. I got to this:
"Opinions differ as to whether the species P. aethiopicus, P. boisei and P. robustus should be included within the genus Australopithecus. The current consensus in the scientific community is that they should be placed in a distinct genus, Paranthropus, which is believed to have developed from the ancestral Australopithecus line. Up until the last half decade the majority, however, included all the species of both Australopithecus and Paranthropus in a single genus."
It never mentions why. Why and how are far more important than who, what, and where. Any web user can find the latter three, a good reference then will elaborate. This is of course all just opinion though. Please share yours.--Dustin Asby 07:32, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paranthropus 

message: This entry is incorrect in stating "brown lemur" represents all Eulemur species.  It only refers to one species (Eulemur fulvus) or perhaps three (E. fulvus, E. albocollaris and E. collaris - if the latter two are considered distinct species).  "True lemurs" is the common name for the entire genus.  Also, "sexual dichromatism" is the preferred term for sexual dimorphism in color patterns.  Eulemur species occupy dry forests as well as rain forests.  No true lemur or brown lemur weighs more than around 2.5 kg (the accurate range is approximately 1.5-2.5 kg).  Finally, Eulemur social systems include single-male/single-female groups, so group size is 2-15 (although the figures cited are correct for brown lemurs).
:Incorrect, as there are two genera of "true lemurs", with the Ring-tailed Lemur, in genus Lemur. You should pick up a copy of Groves' Primate Taxonomy where he gives common names for each Primate genera, and "brown lemurs" is what he gives to Eulemur. Unfortunately, Mammal Species of the World (3rd ed, 2005) doesn't seem to list the common names of the genera. I've modified the article otherwise. Please consider making edits yourself and perhaps registering to make an account. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:22, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: seems like this could all be cleared up if we would use the Mittermeier source and go with Mittermeier's common term for the Eulemur: "True Lemurs".  the full reference is: Russell Mittermeier et al., Lemurs of Madagascar, Conservation International (1994)Anlace 22:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brown lemur 

message: I was dissapointed to see that there is no stub type for primates nor anthropology. Does anyone else on here think that these would be useful?--Dustin Asby 20:27, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean stub tag? Go for it. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Proposing stubs seems to be more involved than I assumed. I don't really have time to go through and find every primate related stub.--Dustin Asby 19:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I counted about 75 or so that are tagged as mammal stubs, and put in a request. Just keep an eye on it and then go ahead and make the new template when you are ready. I'll help out re-tagging. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stubs 

message: Dear WikiProjects Primate-Experts. I took a picture of monkey once, the image is now on the Commons. I have trouble putting it into the correct primate category though, could anyone please take a look and help me out?  The image was taken in Rajasthan, close to Jaipur, these monkeys with long tails and black faces were very common in the area. Thanks alot. Gryffindor 21:15, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, for starters, take a look in Old World monkey. You can rule out the typically African groups (the Cercopithecinae monkeys besides the macaques, and the African Colobinae monkeys) leaving the macaques and the Asian Colobinae monkeys. It doesn't look like a macaque to me (although I could be wrong) and I don't think I see anything odd with its nose (but the pic is dark), so I'm going to hazard a guess at it being in one of these three genera: Semnopithecus, Trachypithecus, or Presbytis. If you've got some better pics, I might be able to help you narrow down the possibilities. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Even better... Presbytis is not endemic to India. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Corbet and Hill (1992; Mamm of Indomalayan Region) only list Semnopithecus entellus as being from this part of India (as well as Rhesus, but I'm with UtherSRG in saying it's a langur of some sort).  I think it's a good match.  Note that they use entellus to describe all species listed on the Semnopithecus page.  I think that narrows it down to genus.  Duff and Lawson (2005) list ranges for S. ajax, S. entellus, and S. hector that may overlap this range.  Both S. ajax and S. hector are described as in the Himalayas or Himalayan foothills, so I suspect this animal is probably S. entellus (s.s).  --Aranae 06:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identification of monkey 

message: Would anyone have a reference for, or be able to venture an opinion on, the claim in the Homo erectus soloensis article that specimens of this subsp. have been found in Australia? AFAIK soloensis (aka "Ngandong") is only attested to in finds made in Indonesia, and furthermore, no erectus finds of any designation have been made in Australia (indeed, only sapiens remains have been securely identified from the Australian continent, including Sahul). Does anyone know of any claims to H. erectus finds east or south of the Wallace Line?
Also, I gather that the taxonomy (erectus vs. sapiens) for soloensis is still the subject of some debate, as indeed are the ages of these specimens (anywhere from 250kya to as recent as 27kya), however the present article makes it sound like a done deal. Perhaps the taxobox entry should be marked with a "?"--cjllw | TALK 07:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You raise plenty of good points. Be bold and start editting! *grins* - UtherSRG (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''H. erectus soloensis'' 

message: I was working through some 1911 articles and came across the Pluto Monkey, which EB says was Cercopithecus leucampyx -  I have a feeling it may just be a C. moma, but have been unable to fins it on a list of synonyms, so I though someone here might have a better idea.--nixie 03:19, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: MSW2 lists as a synonym of C. mitis  --Aranae 08:35, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

text: As does MSW3. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: EB 1911

message: There has been some discussion regarding changing the recommendations for common-name capitalization to better match what some users feel is the style found in the scientific literature and other sources. You may wish to view the discussion or participate at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (fauna). — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine. However, WP:PRIM will continue to capitalize. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 

message: Hi, I'm a member of the Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Shanel 20:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project

message: Should the article name of a population be the species name with the population name in parenthese, for example Horse (American population), or should they get their own unique name, for example American horse? KimvdLinde 08:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of populations 

message: While trying to find information about this howler in order to create a stub for it I discoverd that its existence as a seperate species seems controversial. The best overview  of the howler controversy I can find doesn't even mention A. Macconnelli KalevTait 03:50, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That ref is dated 1999. Groves separated macconelli from seniculus in 2001 (Primate Taxonomy, pags 178-184 for the genus). Also, insulanus is a synonym for macconelli. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Guyanan Red Howler]] 

message: I've added a stub for it, but it still needs a binomial_authority, a picture and a wikispecies link, none of which I'm sure how to go about. KalevTait 17:33, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, Groves split it off from Hapalemur to be monotypic in Prolemur. I've updated the taxobox accordingly, adding the authorities. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ack! Maybe I should get myself a copy of the book :p KalevTait 20:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Greater Bamboo Lemur]] 

message: I have nominated the Neanderthal article at WP:AID, and invite everyone of you, to improve this article (not just vote for it). It would be a great feature article. I would like to make it clear, due to some controversies at WP:AID that I believe that there is nothing wrong in advertising this nomination here, being this the WikiProject Primates, it seems the best place to solicite help and not just votes. Thank you. --Francisco Valverde 13:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Neanderthal]] at [[WP:AID]] 

message: It seems like a natural standard reference to add is this definitive work on lemurs: Russell Mittermeier et al., Lemurs of Madagascar, Conservation International (1994) Anlace 23:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, as long as you note that it is over ten years old and don't use it as a taxonomic reference. Lots of changes since then. Mammal Species of the World 3rd ed (2005) is the most recent taxonomy. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: If people need images of a phylogeny based on articles that they have found, but can not copy due to copyright issues, I can make them on request. Kim van der Linde at venus 04:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you give an example? - UtherSRG (talk) 09:48, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, :Image:Cockatoos.jpg or :Image:Psittacula.jpg. I could also use all kind of different forms. Kim van der Linde at venus 09:54, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phylogeny images 

message: Awful lot of former subspecies was split. How it is substaniated? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.152.84.114 (talk • contribs) .
:By various different processes and authors and scientists over many years. See . - UtherSRG (talk) 17:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomical splitting 

message: As mentioned in the above project talk page, currently the list only appears to include great apes. IMHO either it needs to be expanded or at least the opening paragraph re-worked (I appreciate there may not be many famous lesser apes but we should at least mention that it is intended to include all apes so people trying to add to it don't get confused). Or alternatively, we should rename it. Nil Einne 21:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that there should be a very brief explanation that gibbons don't tend to get famous. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I recently expanded the article on Sam (orangutan) who was in the film Dunston Checks In.  He and his mate and son now live in a wonderful non-proft habitat.  Perhaps other members could generate an article on the non-proft?  ThanksLiPollis 06:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of apes]] 

message: I was thinking of starting a wikiproject for anthropology. Is anyone interested? Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen! 11:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just made a proposal on the "list of proposed wikiprojects" page. If you're interested, you can sign up at our entry and on the temporary project page. Thanks. Ungovernable ForceThe Wiki Kitchen! 21:05, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal for another wikiproject 

message: I floated the idea of another wikiproject over at the Evolutionary Biology project, but there has been no response. Here might be a better fit as I recognize more of the names. I have been working on creating some consistency in the early hominid category, mainly between articles about fossils and articles about species. As you can imagine with several species only known by 1 fossil it can be quite confused. Rhodesian man is a prime example. Do you guys think we need another wikiproject or could I work it out in the structure of this project? Nowimnthing 21:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no reason you couldn't do it under these auspices. Good for you! - UtherSRG (talk) 10:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Descendant wikiproject: human evolution

message: Lucy
Picture of Lucy Remains, Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico City	Picture of Lucy Remains, Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico City
Catalog number:                                                     	AL 288-1
Species:                                                            	Australopithecus afarensis
Age:                                                                	3.2 mya
Place discovered:                                                   	Ethiopia
Date discovered:                                                    	1974
Discovered by:                                                      	Donald Johanson
                                                                    	
===Pages not on Human evolution template===
*Homo erectus soloensis
*Archaic Homo sapiens expand or merge?
*Cro-Magnon deprecated term, make page about fossils and merge with Cro-Magnon 1?
*Hominina add to template?
*Homo cepranensis oops, missed that one
*Meganthropus 
*Tchadanthropus uxoris added merge template to erectus
*Telanthropus capensis has merge template to ergaster
*Peking Man rename Homo erectus pekinensis?
Some of these may need to be added to the template, others either need to be merged/cleaned up to indicate their status as controversial or deprecated.
:All of these already have the Cat on them. H. cepranensis is on the template. Tc. uxoris and Te. capensis should be merged to H. erectus and either H. ergaster or H. erectus respectively. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorting work for Human evolution articles

message: *Homo erectus soloensis
*Archaic Homo sapiens expand or merge?
*Cro-Magnon deprecated term, make page about fossils and merge with Cro-Magnon 1?
*Hominina add to template?
*Homo cepranensis oops, missed that one
*Meganthropus 
*Tchadanthropus uxoris added merge template to erectus
*Telanthropus capensis has merge template to ergaster
*Peking Man rename Homo erectus pekinensis?
Some of these may need to be added to the template, others either need to be merged/cleaned up to indicate their status as controversial or deprecated.
:All of these already have the Cat on them. H. cepranensis is on the template. Tc. uxoris and Te. capensis should be merged to H. erectus and either H. ergaster or H. erectus respectively. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pages not on Human evolution template

message: please strike off any tasks that are finished Nowimnthing 16:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: finished?

message: Homo floresiensis is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality.  Sandy 21:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Homo floresiensis]]

message: Are articles about individual primates, e.g. Koko (gorilla), within the scope of this project? Elliskev 16:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno. Why? - UtherSRG (talk) 16:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok. What do you hope to accomplish by using that tag? Improved visibility from this WikiProject? I ask not to say no, but to help suss out what the problem is and how it might be best addressed. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds reasonable to me. - UtherSRG (talk) 03:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual primates 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 23:52, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: There is currently a barnstar proposal at :Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals#Wildlife Barnstar for a barnstar which would be available for use for this project. Please feel free to visit the page and make any comments you see fit. Badbilltucker 15:33, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wildlife Barnstar 

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 03:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: Forgive me if someone has already raised this issue. I noticed that the Homo neanderthalensis article has detailed date ranges for its origins and extinctions in the first paragraph of the article, but the Homo erectus article doesn't begin to give that information until much later in the text. I realize the chronology a complex and evolving issue, but it would be great to give a simple date range in Homo erectus in the first paragraph. I think there is some Wiki-guideline about presenting summarical info in the first paragraph.
Additionally, perhaps the taxo-box for Hominids and other extinct primates could contain dates ranges. It would be good for giving the reader a quick idea of the chronological place of extinct primates and Hominids. Mumun 20:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxo-boxes and/or harmonizing Hominid date ranges in the intro of articles 

message: There is now a proposed project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Veterinary Medicine to deal with matters of veterinary medicine, a subject which currently has disproportionately low content in wikipedia. Any wikipedia editors who have an interest in working on content related to the subject are encouraged to indicate as much there. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 22:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Veterinary medicine project 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 17:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards