User talk:Eclecticology
Welcome to the 'pedia! Good work on the Library of Congress articles. maveric149
I'm not convinced that every article that uses the word "mores" needs a link to mores. Vicki Rosenzweig
- You're probably right. It's not a major issue with me, and I suppose I did get a little mechanical about it. As long as there are enough links to illustrate the breadt of the term, I'm happy. Certainly it's more than a synonym for taboo as was in there before. --Eclecticology
Good work on organizing wikipedia talk:naming conventions -- oftentimes these talk pages get so long that previous discussion becomes useless to more current discussion. However, it probably would have been a good idea to have moved the headings to the new parentheticaly named pages -- just to give people context as to where the original discussion took place and why (For example, the heading for the Linda Lovelace discussion). Cheers! --maveric149
About birds: I just added Falconiformes and Strigiformes (so that bird of prey would have some orders to link to) and found that ITIS is using a completely different set of orders than I'm used to and than Aves uses. (The one I'm used to is in Grzimek.) ITIS puts eagles, flamingos, and storks together. According to a tidbit about their parasites which I read in Grzimek, flamingoes are more like ducks than like storks. So I think ITIS is wrong here. -phma
What is ITIS? And why do we now have a bunch of taxonomic pages that don't actually define or identify their subjects beyond unlinked identification of their relations? (There's barely enough to tell that Hamamelidales is a group of plants.) Vicki Rosenzweig