The following text is preserved as an archive of discussions atUser talk:Hesperian.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made onUser talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.

I think you are the editor who added to this page the text "Species of nectarivorous birds that have been observed feeding on B. nivea include...." (03:15, 14 June 2009). I'm wondering what B.nivea has to do with this article. Could you clarify this please? Thanks, and best regards, --Derek Andrews (talk)20:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My bad; copy-paste error. I used that source (Food of Australian Birds) to expand manyBanksia species articles, and must have used theB. nivea text as a template for other articles.Hesperian23:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hesperian. You seem to know about plants. Recently I performed an 'uncontroversial move' of this article fromSugar Pine toSugar pine. But doing a Whatlinkshere toPinus lambertiana, the scientific name, I see that tree species like this one are very often named by their scientific name. Taking a look atList of California native plants it seems that about half the trees have English names with what looks like improper capitalization and the other half are under their scientific names. Do you have any ideas of what is best to do? Thanks,EdJohnston (talk)20:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. After looking atWP:FLORA and a few other articles it looks to me there is an equally strong case for Sugar Pine, Sugar pine and Pinus lambertiana. Better leave it before it gets any more confusing.EdJohnston (talk)21:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi Ed, they should all be at scientific names - I generally move where I find. Only a minority of plants have common names, and those that do often have several. For conformity it works best - seeWikipedia:WikiProject Plants#Plant_article_naming_conventions Cheers,Casliber (talk·contribs)21:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for discussing this, guys. I agree that moving to the scientific name would be ideal. I'm happy to update redirects, copy, and such where appropriate.Ringbang (talk)22:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Hesperian01:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not removespeedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did withCategory:EPBC Act conservation dependent biota. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, then you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says:Click here to contest this speedy deletion and appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article'stalk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the category. Thank you. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk)22:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors ofthis article know that it will be appearing asthe main page featured article on August 12, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb atWikipedia:Today's featured article/August 12, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directorsRaul654 (talk ·contribs) or his delegateDabomb87 (talk ·contribs), or atWikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions ofthe suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on theMain Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks!Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect?Correct it!See terms and conditions.18:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

North Island is the northernmost island in theHoutman Abrolhos, acoral reefarchipelago in theIndian Ocean off the coast ofMid WestWestern Australia. Located approximately 14 km (9 mi) from the nearest island group, it is one of the largest islands in the Houtman Abrolhos, and is of the few to supportdune systems. It has relatively diverse flora dominated bychenopod shrubs and fauna that includes the introducedTammar Wallaby, around 7 species of reptile, and about 15 resident bird species. Discovered and surveyed in 1840, North Island has been a seasonal camp forwestern rock lobster fishermen since the beginning of the 20th century, and this remains the principal focus of human activity on the island. There is also a small amount of tourism, though for the most part it isreserved as conservation habitat for vegetation communities and rare birds. (more...)

Nice to see this on the main page today. --Melburnian (talk)03:01, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ta. :-)Hesperian05:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - a nice surprise on the main page.--Nickm57 (talk)13:26, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've been here long enough to know not to edit war, especially considering that you haven't said mot on the talk page. If you thinktrema (diacritic) should be moved, why don't you see if you can convince the rest of us? —kwami (talk)05:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ray Oldham says that Stirling's tub picked upReveley and his wife at Cape Town, is the list s'posed to show who was on the vessel when it left Blighty, or when it arrived?cygnis insignis16:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It couldn't be when it arrived, or Tully Davy wouldn't be listed. :-( I would imagine that it shows everyone who appeared on the register for the journey, regardless of when they got on or off.Hesperian00:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi H, what would you think of the title,Yucca brevifolia and Joshua Tree? That was rhetorical, but this is not: how aboutSega Genesis and Mega Drive? --Born2cycle (talk)17:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody ludicrous. My phone is aHTC Wildfire and HTC Buzz, I own a copy ofHarry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone and Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone, and I used to drive aNissan Cherry and Nissan Sentra and Nissan Sunny and Holden Astra.Hesperian23:38, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm.Casliber (talk·contribs)01:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BuffingPersoonia lanceolata andPersoonia levis. The taxo history is interesting and not much documented. If you wanted to do more on wikisource maybe the Persoonia segment from Flora Australiensis? Anyway, had a good talk to Peter Weston today.Casliber (talk·contribs)12:38, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol –Survey Invitation Hello Hesperian/Archive 50! TheWMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please clickHERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please seeNPP Survey

The edit history shows that you made a number of edits toAtlas of Australian Birds. A Good Article Review has been started on this article. You might like to make improvements to the article.Snowman (talk)22:51, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry Christmas
	From me, a happyNSW Xmas bush Xmas from us all down here in Oz (damn, should have 5x expanded that for this Xmas...is there still time I wonder....)Casliber (talk·contribs)05:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate! And you.Hesperian05:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. I was wondering if you might have access tothis new article inAustralian Systematic Botany: Wege, J. 2011. A taxonomic revision of theStylidium despectum group (Stylidiaceae) from southern Australia. 24(6) 375-404http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SB11020 ; I don't seem to have access via my university. Hope you had a nice holiday!Rkitko^(talk)20:27, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yep, check your email.Hesperian02:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Much appreciated.Rkitko^(talk)13:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any time mate.Hesperian00:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hope you had a good christmas - all the best for the new year - cheersSatuSuro00:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently editedAdenanthos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageNigel Barker (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)11:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hesperian. Happy New Year. The same old topic raises its unverified head again with the discovery of a "Portuguese Swivel Gun." SeeNat Geographic Jan 10, 2012 An anon user has just alerted me. Doubtless someone will want to add this as an "important find" to various pages.Nickm57 (talk)08:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha! What we need is a source that points out that this is a "perennial favourite" proposition for which people are constantly proferring putative new evidence that fails scrutiny. This isnearly what we need:

"Persisting in an ongoing trickle of parochial books (see Trickett 2007 for the latest) is the unyielding theory that the first non-Aboriginal discoverers of Australia were Portuguese mariners who mapped part of the continent in the early sixteenth century, preceding the Dutch by almost one hundred years. This theory has never been disproved – and thus strictly speaking it is still possible it will be corroborated in the future with new evidence – but on the other hand, dozens of articles and books have brought us to a point where the one thing we know for sure is that there isn’t a skerrick of non-circumstantial evidence to support this theory (King 2008; Richardson 2006). It is yet another theological edifice, all neon lights and no foundations. Despite the scholars in this field generally agreeing there is no compelling evidence supporting this theory, it remains popular amongst non-historian consumers of history."

—Stallard, Avan Judd (2008). "Better thanThe Da Vinci Code".History Australia.5 (3). Monash University Press: 77.9.

And a happy new year to you too. :-)

Hesperian10:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now getting mileage in book-viral-face (fb)  :(SatuSuro22:55, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently editedSynaphea spinulosa, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pagesPetiole,Peduncle andLamina (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read theFAQ • Join us at theDPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow theseopt-out instructions. Thanks,DPL bot (talk)10:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked at thediscussion, and atWikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 13, along withexamples of the trial run, after which the bot was approved, and I'm not clear why the bot was blocked. You appear to be saying that the bot was not approved to change "manually converted units with calls to{{convert}}". The application was based onWikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Lightbot 3, which contains: "Converting units using{{convert}}, simplify that template, correct errors with its use. This includes adding and modifying the convert template." Reading the discussions and the trial, it appears that one of the stated aims of the bot was to replace manually converted units with{{convert}}, and after a trial in which the bot did just that, the bot was approved. Can you explain the thinking behind your block?SilkTork^{✔Tea time}14:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there's also a brief discussion about the bot's status atWikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval#User:Lightbot.ASCIIn2Bme (talk)16:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

SilkTolk, you're missing the distinction between "converting units using{{convert}}" (for example, converting "2.5 mi" to "{{convert|2.5|mi|km}}") and "replacing manually converted units with calls to{{convert}}" (for example, converting "2.5 mi (4.0 km)" to "{{convert|2.5|mi|km}}"). Your trial run diff doesn't speak to the latter. It is the latter that I object to. And it is the latter that, as far as I can tell, was brand new, undiscussed, unapproved, highly controversial functionality.

Also, you've only linked to the unblock discussion; the main discussion ishere.

Cheers,

Hesperian02:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. I think the issue later spotted by Smalljim (21:59, 10 October 2011) about Lightbot ungrammatically rewording sentences is enough not to allow it to continue.ASCIIn2Bme (talk)03:58, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plusthis one is amusing.ASCIIn2Bme (talk)04:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
	Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy yourAustralia Day and please continue your good work!LauraHale (talk)02:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hesperian,

My name is Jonathan Obaruser:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the communityHERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your nameHERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk)01:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a note to let the main editors ofBanksia cuneata know that the article will be appearing astoday's featured article on March 6, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb atWikipedia:Today's featured article/March 6, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article directorRaul654 (talk ·contribs) or his delegateDabomb87 (talk ·contribs), or start a discussion atWikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions atWikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Banksia cuneata is anendangered species offlowering plant in theProteaceae family. Endemic tosouthwestWestern Australia, it belongs to thesubgenusIsostylis, which contains three closely related species with flower clusters that are dome-shaped heads rather than characteristicBanksia flower spikes. A shrub or small tree up to 5 m (16 ft) high, it has prickly foliage and pink and cream flowers. The common nameMatchstick Banksia arises from the blooms in late bud, the individual buds of which resemble matchsticks. The species ispollinated byhoneyeaters. AlthoughB. cuneata was first collected before 1880, it was not until 1981 that Australian botanistAlex George formally described and named the species. There are two genetically distinct population groups, but no recognised varieties. ThisBanksia is classified as endangered, surviving in fragments of remnant bushland in a region which has been 93% cleared for agriculture. AsBanksia cuneata is killed by fire and regenerates from seed, it is highly sensitive to bushfire frequency; fires recurring within four years could wipe out populations of plants not yet mature enough to set seed.Banksia cuneata is rarely cultivated, and its prickly foliage limits its utility in the cut flower industry. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk)23:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Wikisource portal has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion atthe template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯05:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On27 March 2012,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleBanksia oblongifolia, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... that the larger of two varieties ofBanksia oblongifolia(pictured) described in 1987 was calledminor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Banksia oblongifolia.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and add it toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

On20 April 2012,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleEucalyptus robusta, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was... thatEucalyptus robusta(pictured) is planted to drain swamps inUganda? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Eucalyptus robusta.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

A file that you uploaded or altered,File:Banksia integrifolia on the Main page.jpg, has been listed atWikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see thediscussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.Cloudbound (talk)21:34, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered,File:Paddy Hannan Memorial.jpg, has been listed atWikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on thefile description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry atthe discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.Magog the Ogre (talk)06:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What a remarkablyastute comment! There is so much .... errrr ... "rhubarb" on wp that it is refreshing to read something that has been thought about before it was written. You make a good point. Clearly, I need to put more effort into engaging my brain before opening my mouth. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Despite the fact that I believe what I said, you remind me thatIt Ain't What You Do (It's the Way That You Do It). Cheers,Pdfpdf (talk)10:22, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hullo, you replied to to a piece I posted elsewhere about my failure to logon WS. The various responses makes me think if I were to register now on WS as 'APWOOLRICH', instead of 'Apwoolrich' and then get changed to this on WP, and the other wikis I am on, the problem will be solved, for I can then do cross wiki registration. Kind regards.Apwoolrich (talk)09:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vaguelly remember you spent some time working on soil structure in thePerth Basin, I got these profiles recently in Jandakot, hope you can use and give some details about ThxGnangarra10:32, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's really interesting. I'll try to find time to dig out those soil books.Hesperian00:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm buffing this now, if you feel like taking a look. If not, no biggie...Casliber (talk·contribs)01:32, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In case you didn't see,Banksia ilicifolia is now featured. I saw a great graftedBanksia nobilis in Peter Olde's garden a few weeks ago - which got me thinking that it'd be good to buff that article to GA - so if you do feel interested in harvesting studies etc, I'll be buffing it at some stage. Cheers,Casliber (talk·contribs)00:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

planted --Gerda Arendt (talk)19:54, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. Well done, Cas.Hesperian00:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now if Gnangarra got a photo ofoligantha one spring....that'd be good to roll onto FAC and all three would be done(chuckle).Casliber (talk·contribs)11:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thatwould be pretty awesome....Hesperian11:54, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving theMidnight Oil article back to its proper title. I had just discovered it had been moved, breaking hundreds of links, and was trying to figure out what to do. -Salamurai (talk)03:40, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Hesperian. A keen but anonymous editor has appeared on the theory of Portuguese etc...page. Would you join me by having a look at this? CheersNickm57 (talk)21:44, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good - nice and clean. CheersNickm57 (talk)05:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

...Talk:Invasive plants of Australian origin, a page that you created. --Alan Liefting (talk -contribs)02:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lists of Australian biota, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments atthe category's entry on theCategories for discussion page. Thank you.BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs)18:03, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Banksia
	Thank you for quality contibutions to articles forProject Banksia such asBanksia ilicifolia - repeating: you are anawesome Wikipedian (9 January 2010)! --Gerda Arendt (talk)06:52, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gawsh, thanks.Hesperian11:17, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've declined some of the deletions. The policy is may be deleted not must be deleted,. For some of the specialized articles, nobody else is very likely to create them & they do not show the peculiarities for which he was originally blocked. ,

You probably disagree. If you think I'm very wrong I suggest we discuss it here as least drama.And then if necessary at AfD. DGG ( talk)04:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not around much at the moment and have no idea what has been going on. Judging from what you've written, Paul has been caught socking again, and someone has AfD'd a bunch of articles on the grounds they were posted by a banned user. In my experience the problem with Paul is in his interactions, not in his contributions to the encyclopaedia. I'm happy to back your judgement on this.Hesperian12:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I finally had a look at this. I can't figure out why these articles have suddenly been nominated for deletion after all this time. It just seems absurd to me.Hesperian00:49, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On17 December 2012,Did you know? was updated with a fact from the articleAngophora hispida, which you created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Angophora hispida. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page(here's how,quick check) and it will be added toDYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on theDid you know? talk page.

Golly, thanks... but I don't think I created or substantially expanded this one.Hesperian03:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you did - take a look at the history. You're just a WA snob who denies liking eastern state plants ;)Casliber (talk·contribs)05:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I had a look. Eug created it. I have made a few small edits to the taxobox, categories and stub tags; zero edits to the text. Sorry Cas, I know you hate to take all the credit for your excellent work, but you're going to have to this time.Hesperian05:28, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Damn that edit history! Makes itimpossible tohide under a bushel.--Curtis Clark (talk)06:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know - I must have hastily looked at the last 50 edits and forgotten it had an older page...oh well. Ifixed that now....Casliber (talk·contribs)11:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

	Merry antipodean Xmas
	hope yours is/was fun, and you had a good turkey :) Cheers,Casliber (talk·contribs)06:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cas, have a great one yourself. :-)Hesperian07:18, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

trying....Casliber (talk·contribs)07:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had a question about the above file that youdeleted on Commons. I originally uploaded that, probably early in 2006, and it was later copied over frommy Flickr account by the bot. I was curious as to why you deleted and redirected the one I uploaded rather than the duplicate the bot uploaded? Cheers.CambridgeBayWeather (talk)08:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I just deleted the one that was tagged as a duplicate. Would you like me to reverse it?Hesperian10:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I figured it was something like that. If you can reverse it that would be great. Also if you could I found[1] which was uploaded by the bot and theredirect. There are also two duplicates,[2] and[3] but the originals are still there. Thanks.CambridgeBayWeather (talk)13:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Hesperian13:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.CambridgeBayWeather (talk)23:38, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I happened to notice that there are a lot ofBanksia redirects from one scientific name to another that are tagged as{{R to scientific name}}. However, this was meant only for redirects from a common name to a scientific name according to its documentation andTemplate:R template index#Alternative names. The tag should now be the newer{{R from alternative scientific name}}.Peter coxhead (talk)08:02, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information.Hesperian09:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

oooh, that's good ta know....Casliber (talk·contribs)11:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

seeing your moniker onthe watch screen thingermebobby, revisiting some of the scenes of yesteryear and all...SatuSuro08:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I still check in every day. Usually multiple times. Just not editing at the moment. Rock on!Hesperian10:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yeah a vast slab of marie celestes floating towards the edge (as in vertical drops)... tinkering on the titanic deck chairs with the more interesting textual patterns, sirens at all times of day and night, surreal patterns ofishihara glowing in the dark... etc etc. other than that quite sandy... and a lot of dog pooSatuSuro08:05, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hesperian. You have new messages atTalk:List of regions of Australia#What categorises a region?.
Message added 03:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC). You canremove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

	Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
	Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy yourAustralia Day and please continue your good work!Hawkeye7 (talk)22:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know how much you love our old pollies. I'm having some problems with an article which I created onThomas Davy (politican), whilst I have based it mainly on various obituarys for him - it seems that the article is too closely aligned to the ADB article. I was hoping that a second set of eyes could help out.Dan arndt (talk)08:14, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hesperian, I appreciate that you're presently having a break from Wikipedia. However, I'd value your help and wondering if I could tap into your expertise to either create new maps (or teach me how to create the maps) that allow for changes, introduced during 2012, forIBRA7. Is this something you're willing to help with?Rangasyd (talk)11:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Rangasyd. I am still around but not contributing much; I am busy on a sister project these days. These IBRA region articles were quite a passion for me at the time, and that passion sustained me through the complicated process of obtaining a freeware GIS, learning how to use it, downloading the IBRA data and various other free datasets, and creating an image for each region. It was a big job, and I've now forgotten 90% of what I learned in doing it. I would like to promise to help, but deep down I know that I wouldn't get around to much.Hesperian11:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts, let me have a further think about this. It wouldn't have to be done the same we I did it last time. I have some python code lying around for turning GIS vectors into SVG. Perhaps I could script something up....Hesperian11:42, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lol - go on - give it a go - we need something for the oceanic side of things... all the oceanic 3 dimensional stuff :) - long abandoned - it still needs picking up the pieces from about 5 years ago...sats14:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hesperian,

You may wish to updateUser:Hesperian/Notes/Botanists, which I noticed coming up under "what links here" after I moved some pages. I have done the following:

• Moved: Johan Peter Falck toJohan Peter Falk
• Moved: Henry Borron Fielding toHenry Barron Fielding
• Moved: Old version of Friedrich Vierhapper toFriedrich Karl Max Vierhapper
• Created from redir: A new version ofFriedrich Vierhapper

I don't think I've moved any others, but I can't be sure of my memory. If I find more I'll let you know.Hamamelis (talk)11:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ta.Hesperian11:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above text is preserved as an archive of discussions atUser talk:Hesperian.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made onUser talk:Hesperian. No further edits should be made to this page.