User talk:Merry Beth

Welcome!

Hello, Merry Beth! 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) 17:46, 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

Comments

Mary-Beth, great job on hibernation revisions.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mary-Beth, I put in a new section about movement, like during a day, week, year or whatever. Under the new section title I put a link to a webpage that talks exclusively about it. See what you think should go in and if you can find any other possible references for this heading.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In one of Rob's last links, the one that has "New Jersey" in the reference, is a comprehensive list of plants "associated with" Bog turtle habitat. Should we include this list verbatim, in part, at all?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think its pertinent information too because as a group we are trying to add as much information on the topic, but should it be in list format, in its own paragraph, or along with what you have already added? I guess this is an issue for the the peer reviewers.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:08, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right, it would only make sense in the habitat section because that's where they are.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and we probably should say something like "Their natural predators include blah, blah, and blah" in the threats section and in the longevity section just say that many die young because they are preyed upon. I think we should make these changes before friday (because I think Mr. Butler will look at ALL articles on that day).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice changes to Threats and Habitat sections! And did you figure out how to do the reference rename / clean-up thing?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:09, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When you guys went through your sections did you check the compatability between the information in the article and the references and the links. If you did I believe you, I'm about to do my sections now.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some person left an extensive review on the GA review page, you should check it out and help make some changes, I think I got down to "Link chestnut" before I had to do something (study for the massive virus test that I will surely fail). Anyways good luck, oh and I couldn't find a difference in weight between males and females, which is one of the first things the person said. Cheers!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, got some news, I did the lead and description sections (addressed the concerns of the person on the GA review page), rob is going to work on the taxonomy and distribution sections (the concerns their), and you can work the behavior and (if anybody else comes along with concerns) the reproduction section. You missed the hardest test of MY LIFE. Cool Beans.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 15:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mary-Beth, can you take of the new suggestions for the reproduction section that the person made on the GA review page? I'll do the "threats" things, thanks. Tell Rob to do his sections!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That lady has left a number of suggestions. I did some of them (I said what I did in my comments at the bottom of the page).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:52, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, she has left some more stuff. I left a Done by the things I did, if you could check off what you remember doing and help me correct some more things that should satisfy her concerns (a lo1 of it i5 just sp3ll1nng).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the third (and final) pass, Sasata noted some spelling errors on the lead, but I am a terrible speller and won't be of much help, so if you could, can you skim through the words in the lead (and perhaps the article) looking for spelling errors?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Topic idea

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

File copyright problem with File:The_Eiffel_Tower_in_the_summer.JPG

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:The_Eiffel_Tower_in_the_summer.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Closedmouth (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

		The Original Barnstar
		Congratulations on your success in reaching GA status on the article Bog Turtle; you represent the AP Project with distinction! --JimmyButler (talk) 00:19, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bog towards FA

You should take a look at what Sasata has put at the bottom of the bog turtle discussion page, I think If we take care of these few things within the next couple of days (so people don't leave or get bored of us), we should have FA by 1/15/10, no problem.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think the distribution map I slapped togethor looks O.K.? I justed asked Sasata and am waiting for a response.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Mary-Beth, check out the map in the article, pretty sweet job by the image lab people, huh?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:20, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page

Mary Beth, I archived the old bog talk page and made another, longer request for a review.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Woah! I didn't even know that the archive thing existed... that's great. Now maybe people will start commenting.--Merry Beth (talk) 04:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, stromb already said some things. Do you think we should just put it up for peer-review again and see what people say, like he suggested?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:12, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think yes, because right now its just kind of stagnant...--Merry Beth (talk) 22:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll do it tonight.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some more thins up on the peer review page.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed some of the small sections altogether (for now at least). If people (or if you) want us to put them back and expand them will always be in the sandbox.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok that sounds good--Merry Beth (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bog Citations

Mary Beth, User:Donlammers left us some things to do with the references at the bottom of the talk page, maybe me you and Rob can split up the work?

FAC

Mary Beth, are you ready to put up the article for FA review? Mr. Butler seems to think we're ready.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:21, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I think we should. It has waited long enough and this will give us time to correct things if it doesn't make it the first time.--Merry Beth (talk) 20:13, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:39, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Mary Beth, its up there, the new banner is at the top of the talk page. And now we wait...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:37, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray!--Merry Beth (talk) 01:21, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Technical difficulties. I screwed up, kinda. We need to try and satisfy Sasata's concerns before we go through the FA review process. In short, could you establish an e-mail on your Wikipedia user page so I can forward an e-mail that Sasata has sent me that has links to about 10 PDFs! We have some work to do yet. Right now its about 11:00 P.M., Saturday, I will check back some time tomorrow to try and get you those links.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the wait, Dom. I wasn't home this weekend and didn't have internet access where I was, but my e-mail address is now up.--Merry Beth (talk) 22:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. I will e-mail you the links Sasata has sent me. Tomorrow I think me, you, and Rob should divide up the readings (there's nine pdfs and three of us, so the numbers work out nicely). I will tell Rob tomorrow to establish an e-mail on wikipedia.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I read most of the first PDF, the conservation one that talks about nothing but a lack of genetic diversity in bog turtle populations, and my head is spinning. This article was waaaaay to focused on one relatively unimportant topic, so much so that I feel if we included it in the article it would hinder our chances at FA. What do you think (I believe Mr. Butler would feel the same way I do...on that PDF at least).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I feel the same way. That one seemed like it was too in depth, and the bits of information that weren't too specific were things that we already mentioned in the article. I'll read through the others to see what I can find.--Merry Beth (talk) 22:32, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PDFs

Hey Mary-Beth, I took a peak at the third PDF that Sasata sent us and it seems a lot like the first in that it is really specific research that is way over the head of the scope of the article. Should we summarize the purpose/topic of the article in one sentence and reference it like Mr. Butler said we should do with the first one?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thats what I think, and then just add that sentence to one of our sections.--Merry Beth (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another PDF

Sasata has pointed me in the direction of this PDF: [1]. I think if we pick this apart section by section ('cause it's kind of long) and include some information, we can make it through FAC.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some things I caught.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

I have nominated the article for FAC (!!!).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YAY! I'm so excited!--Merry Beth (talk) 03:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, me too.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This May Seem Somewhat Invasive But...

Hi Mary-Beth, you may have noticed the GA symbol in the top right corner of your user page that links to the coolest article ever...that was me. I thought it would look nice, however, if you're not one for vanity, feel totally free to 86 it. --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Woah thats awesome! Thank you!--Merry Beth (talk) 01:06, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, you deserve it! Plus, once we reach FA, it will be a star (or at least we will be morally aloud to change it to one ; -)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:29, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haha Yay! I'm so ecited! After all this I think it will be well deserved.--Merry Beth (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm excited(?) too!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More!

Arrgghh...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you feel we should add the karyotype information?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Karyotype of the bog turtle doesn't seem to important to me... but I can't speak for everyone else. I'll look at a few random FA animal articles and see if they added it or not and base my decision on that. :)--Merry Beth (talk) 00:17, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, out of 10 random FA animal articles that i looked at none of them mentioned karyotype. I don't think we really need to either.--Merry Beth (talk) 00:30, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Ucucha mentioned a couple on the talk page, but I still think it's unnecessary.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FA

It's been promoted!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YYYYAAAAAYYYYY!!!!!! Im so glad!!!--Merry Beth (talk) 01:48, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed some things to stars on your user page!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok :D --Merry Beth (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of the Day

Hi there, Merry Beth! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottos. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottos there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By –pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bog turtle on main page

Bog turtle is was on the Main page on Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 30, 2010. Wooh!!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is so cool!!! Woot Woot! hahaha :)--Merry Beth (talk) 00:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Motto of the Day Help Request April 2014

Today's motto...

→ Homo unius libri timeo.
"I fear the man of a single book."

Nominate one today!

Motto of the Day (WP:MOTD) is in a state of emergency and really needs your help! There are not enough editors who are reviewing or nominating mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review, and this probably means that you will notice a red link or “This space for rent” as our mottos for the next weeks and months.

Please take a moment to review the nominations and nominate your own new mottos at Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/In review and Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Nominations/'Specials. Any help would be appreciated! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been sent by pjoef on behalf of Motto of the Day to all editors of the English Wikipedia who are showing MOTD's templates on their pages, and to all the participants to MOTD: (page, template, and category).