User talk:TimHAllstr

Welcome!

Hello, TimHAllstr! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Welcome to the World of Wikipedia and best of luck on your Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2009. Happy editing! --JimmyButler (talk) 17:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Topic idea

North Carolina official biological specimens Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Topic Ideas?

Is there anything you were interested in for our topic? We have to have something by 9/11, which is Friday.

–Vance Miller 17:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vancemiller (talk • contribs)

Selecting refrences

The reference that you selected does not have an author. This website does list online books that you could go to to find the same information though.

Use those books for references instead of this site.

"Causes Some causes of hypertrichosis include: thyroid disorders, skin inflammation, medications, genetic disorders, and chemical imbalanceshttp://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/h/hypertrichosis/causes.htm " —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vancemiller (talk • contribs) 23:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hypertrichosis Sandbox

Types

Causes

Vancemiller (talk) 00:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Hypertrichosis has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Smokizzy (talk) 16:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article/Sandbox

It's hard to know what belongs in the real article and what belongs in the sandbox, if you have some useful information just go ahead and put it in the article. Put stuff you aren't entirely sure about on the sandbox so we can talk about it. I've copied over most of what you have done so far. We need to find a real source to finish this article...... Maybe DocJames will help. –Vancemiller (talk) 01:52, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unit conversion

Hey Tim, you may have the answer to your question already, but just to make sure, here you go:

"typically reach 14 to 20 centimetres (5.5 to 7.9 in) in length"
"typically reach 14 to 20 centimeters (5.5 to 7.9 in) in length"

Hope this helps, good luck!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:23, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I did not know how to find this out, and this was one of the things addressed on the GA review.--TimHAllstr (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

		The Original Barnstar
		Tim - thanks for stepping up and showing them how it's done! You've cleared the way of all excuses!--JimmyButler (talk) 18:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about another

		The Editor's Barnstar
		For your excellent collaboration on another GA article for the good guys, congratulations!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...and another

I thought you might want this... Vancemiller (talk · contribs · count · email) 21:03, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user survived AP Biology 2009.

More like "thrived in!"--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Hey Tim, you may want to spend more time with the Ernst and Lovich google book. I used it for the bog and wood turtles and it was very, very helpful. It should have more that you could include that would alleviate some of the concerns regarding a "global perspective." Let me know if you need any help. I'm rooting for you.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely appreciate the advice and the support. I went to the library today so I could arrange for an inter-library exchange on the 300+ page book about loggerhead sea turtles. I think that will clear up any missing spots in info as well.--TimHAllstr (talk) 22:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just as well. Keep on trucking.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thanks. The only problem I see with further referencing of the Turtles of the US and Canada book is in the title. They say that it is already very US-centric. They even go as far to question the validity of certain pieces of information because it is exclusively from a US source.--TimHAllstr (talk) 00:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Ernst and Lovich book will be the best for this since it's Turtles of the United States and Canada. Do they have another book that is more worldwide? Vancemiller (talk · contribs · count · email) 00:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a great reference though, and I think we should go through the article with it and recite some things/elaborate... Vancemiller (talk · contribs · count · email) 00:52, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would still do that. The loggerhead is a turtle of the U.S. and Canada, but I'm sure the book mentions things about it that pertain to different countries.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Red Fox

"In the United States, raccoons (Procyon lotor) are loggerheads' primary predator, while in Australia European red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) are a common nest invader. South African side-striped j..." etc. Is that bit about Australia missing a word? The Red Fox is not called the European red fox. So perhaps it means Austalia and Europe? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 03:47, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The book states that in Australia European red foxes are a common nest invader. It then states that "Australia's exotic red foxes are responsible for devastating loggerhead populations on the western mainland. This seems strange to me.--TimHAllstr (talk) 03:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that seems odd to me is the use of the word European. Take that out and it's fine. I guess that because the Red Fox was introduced to Australia from Europe that it is known as the European red fox in Australia. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 04:16, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are right since it refers to it as exotic in Australia.--TimHAllstr (talk) 04:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed--TimHAllstr (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't it just need a comma? Like this: "while in Australia, European red foxes [...] are a common nest invader."--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 14:42, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go to BED!!!!!

Obsession - no worries - it will get there!?--JimmyButler (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol thank you for your concern Mr. Butler. Goodnight.--TimHAllstr (talk) 04:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions received

It's not a tool bar as such, but some tools. Most of which are covered in some way by the article already. There are no DABs in the article for example, so the dabs checking is redundant. One thing that does occur is that the prose could be improved. You could ask User:Malleus Fatuorum he worked wonders on the Bog turtle or ask copyeditors at Guild of copy editors. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:20, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.--TimHAllstr (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

URL

Is this URL http://www.coastal.edu/cmws/projects/turtles/anatomy.html viewable to you? If not it maybe dead and can't be used as a source in the article. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So now it's removed you have a sentence as yet unreferenced. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 01:08, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know, I am currently working on getting a reference for the information. Thank you.--TimHAllstr (talk) 01:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed--TimHAllstr (talk) 01:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave you to work on this today, sorry for any edit conflicts. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 01:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.springerlink.com/content/l641g4k4870q234v/ Looks like this is a subscription site and blocking the archive. Is the information cited on the page on in the pdf from that page? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 02:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]