User talk:DanielCD

Taxobox for a plant species

{{Taxobox_begin | color = lightgreen| name = }} <br>{{Status****}}
{{Taxobox_image | image = [[Image:FILENAME.JPG|240px]] | caption = }}
{{Taxobox_begin_placement | color = lightgreen}}
{{Taxobox_regnum_entry | taxon = [[Plant]]ae}}
{{Taxobox_divisio_entry | taxon = [[ophyta]]}}
{{Taxobox_classis_entry | taxon = [[opsida]]}}
{{Taxobox_ordo_entry | taxon = [[ales]]}}
{{Taxobox_familia_entry | taxon = [[aceae]]}}
{{Taxobox_genus_entry | taxon = ''[[G]]''}}
{{Taxobox_species_entry | taxon = ''G. s''}}
{{Taxobox_end_placement}}
{{Taxobox_section_binomial_botany | color = lightgreen| binomial_name = | author = }}
{{Taxobox_end}}

Taxobox for a higher plant group

{{Taxobox_begin | color = lightgreen| name = }}
{{Taxobox_image | image = [[Image:FILENAME.JPG|240px]] | caption = }}
{{Taxobox_begin_placement | color = lightgreen}}
{{Taxobox_regnum_entry | taxon = [[Plant]]ae}}
{{Taxobox_divisio_entry | taxon = [[ophyta]]}}
{{Taxobox_classis_entry | taxon = [[opsida]]}}
{{Taxobox_ordo_entry | taxon = [[ales]]}}
{{Taxobox_familia_entry | taxon = [[aceae]]}}
{{Taxobox_genus_entry | taxon = ''G''}}
{{Taxobox_end_placement}}
{{Taxobox_section_subdivision | color = lightgreen| plural_taxon = }}
taxon1 <br/>
taxon2 <br/>
taxon3
{{Taxobox_end}}

Saharan Cypress & brackets

Hi Daniel - it is normal practice in books not to have brackets in this sort of situation, with the scientific name following straight after the vernacular with no punctuation at all. That's why I'd not put them there in the first place. Think of the scientific name as an integral part of the full name, not an appendage. The sentence referring to the varietal combination is of different structure, so the brackets are appropriate there. - MPF 18:40, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi again, thanks; nice one on Glossopteris, I've done a couple of minor link changes to bypass redirects and changed 'cones' to 'cone-like structures' as they may not have been of the same origin and structure as modern conifer cones - MPF 19:03, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Archaeopteris

Hi Daniel - thanks for the note, looks really good to me, I can't see much to add except a bit of minor copyediting (like all scientific subjects, it should be metric, no need for any archaic imperialist cr@p :-), a few small punctuation etc typos and a few more links) - MPF 21:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cibotium

Hi again - done (tho' JoJan beat me to it on the main correction!). Here's my plant taxobox templates, feel free to use them (just copy & paste); if there's no pic, stick  after, the taxobox image line; and if you don't know the conservation status, delete the <br>{{Status****}} bit - MPF 22:09, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

(addenum) - not your bit (from the IP number who started the page), but I'm not at all sure that mediaeval 'Scythian Lamb' tale applies here, the same is also often cited of cotton, with rather greater likelihood of that being the fibre behind the tale (cotton is still called 'tree wool' in e.g. German) - MPF 22:17, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Tree fern, Cyatheales

Hi Daniel - I suspect these two pages should perhaps be merged. As far as I know, all tree ferns (except one or two not-very-large species of Osmunda) are in Cyatheales. Any thoughts? - MPF 17:35, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Taxoboxes, names

Hi Daniel - it is WP:TOL policy to leave a blank line space at the end of the taxobox, so it is easy to see where the box ends and the text starts when editing, avoiding the risk of accidentally putting paragraphs of text into the taxobox. Of names, there's been lots of debates in the archives, but there is a general (if small) majority to capitalise English species names fully (e.g. Antarctic Beech, not antarctic beech); it isn't being hard-and-fast edited in, but when new pages are started, it is better to use caps, that's why the southern beech page had all the species listed with caps ready for new page starts - MPF 22:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Good luck! Unfortunately a lot of the decisions are buried deep in the archives of the WP:TOL talk, so they are far too easy to overlook. I think you've got the hang of most of them now though :-) The caps for English names has always been contentious, with very strong views held on both sides, but when it's been voted on, the majority was for caps. Though it wasn't a very decisive vote, something like 7:5 if I remember rightly. I'm on the pro-caps camp because it makes things simpler (not having to work out if Abcdef is a proper name or not!), looks neater in lists, and follows standard field guide practice (which is where most people read about plants/animals). - MPF 00:54, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Deluge (mythology)

Thanks for your comments on my talk page. Yeah, these creationists will go to great lengths to try to insert their agenda into everything. After I pointed out that Ungtss (or however you spell that) was very wrong to claim I did not know about mythology, he immediately hopped over to the Myth article and added a big long spiel about what CS Lewis claims about myths. CS Lewis, for crying out loud. It's just part of their long-standing strategy of taking people with minimal credentials in a field pumping them up as supposed experts just because of shared religious beliefs. These people need to be watched like hawks. DreamGuy 20:06, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

Energy development WikiProject

Daniel, could you please add Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy development to your Watchlist and participate in any polls and discussion there? Thanks in advance. We really need some additional input. We are kind of at a standstill on some issues. Tom Haws 05:54, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

Passionate request

Thanks; I'll have a go at it! - MPF 16:34, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Will do - first thing I've had to do at P. caerulea is to turn half the pics the right way up! - MPF 16:56, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Passiflora foetida - Oh my gawd!! MPF 17:25, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Meatflower - the pic shows a species of Rafflesia. I'll move the pic there and make 'meatflower' a redirect to it (the genus is better known by the Latin name) - MPF 18:38, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks; I quite often have to fiddle around with the pics to get the layout to look good; trouble is even that isn't any guarantee as the exact layout varies with the size of the monitor each person uses. Where there's lots of pics, I'm finding the table format (either horizontal or vertical) works best. There's also a new 'gallery' system some people are starting to use, but I don't like it as it doesn't format italics (see e.g. the last revision of Hebe (plant) before my recent revisions). This may well be a minor bug they're working on, so it may work some time in the future, but not yet!. - MPF 20:30, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)