Jump to content

User talk:JurassicClassic767

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

JurassicClassic767, you are invited to the Teahouse!

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi JurassicClassic767! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like MrClog (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

22:51, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Bulk edits

[edit]

Hello, JurassicClassic 767. I noticed you've been making a lot of edits to pterosaur pages recently. These edits are by and large useful, but you should know that making hundreds of little edits in a row can be considered suspicious behavior. Vandals often use this technique to overwhelm reliable editors or make it more difficult to track their work. I'm not accusing you of anything, but just letting you know that it's better to make your edits in large chunks rather than numerous tiny increments. If you're unsure about editing in large sections, you can work in the sandbox to prepare text for articles. Good luck! Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I actually knew that someone would realize about those edits, but the reason why I've done so many minor edits is that I often make mistakes like you said, specially in when putting references. If you visit my user page, you'll see that I put a userbox about fighting vandalism, and I'm not a vandal in any case. Anyway, I just wanted to contribute to pterosaurs, since there are mostly outdated or stubs, and I'm also part of the Pterosaurs task force, but yeah, I understand if someone would suspect about my little edits, and next time, I'll try to make larger edits with the mistakes corrected. JurassicClassic767 (talk) 15:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's no problem, I appreciate your efforts. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 16:58, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! JurassicClassic767 (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ornithocheiromorpha, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Limb (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ornithocheiromorpha

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ornithocheiromorpha you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IJReid -- IJReid (talk) 18:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ornithocheiromorpha

[edit]

The article Ornithocheiromorpha you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ornithocheiromorpha for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IJReid -- IJReid (talk) 21:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ornithocheiromorpha cladogram

[edit]

Averianov (2020) does not actually contain a phylogenetic analysis. It's not only misleading to create a composite of two very different phylogenetic analyses (with portions of each arbitrarily chosen), add a couple other taxa without basis in analysis, and then attribute it to a third paper entirely, it is a violation of WP:SYNTH, as the resulting topology can't be found in any actual study. I've replaced those with the cladogram of Pêgas et al. (2019), with a couple additions after Kellner et al. (2019) (these studies both use the same base dataset and differ in only minor respects). Please keep this in mind for the future. Shuvuuia (talk) 01:06, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On an unrelated note, please avoid writing out entire references twice. You can define a reference once with
<ref name="example"> [insert reference here] </ref>
and then call it elsewhere in the article with
<ref name="example"/>
and it won't be listed multiple times in the reference section. Shuvuuia (talk) 06:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shuvuuia: Honestly, with the cladogram, I was getting a bit confused, there were mentions within other references, but I guess those were just cross-refs and unrelated? I know the original research, but what happened really was that I just got confused with the cross-refs thinking their related or something. Also, thanks for replacing the cladogram and not just delete it directly. As for the repeated refs, I do sometimes miss several, but that article has like 90 refs? Anyway, I didn't do original research, I just got confused with the cross-refs thinking their all related. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 07:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, Averianov 2020 may not have done a phylogenetic analysis of Ornithocheiromorpha, but he has done an analysis for Lonchodectidae, clearly stating that Serradraco, Unwindia and Prejanopterus don't belong to that family. Check it if you don't believe me, it's mentioned at the end of the paragraph. Also, when putting refs, it's better if you put them after any punctuation. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 13:13, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion of the taxonomic placement of Serradraco, Unwindia, and Prejanopterus is not the same as a phylogenetic analysis. The exclusion of these genera is not based on a computational analysis in the same vein as e.g. Pêgas et al. (2019), and it has yet to be seen whether this assessment will be followed up with by other researchers. For now it's fair to keep them out of the taxobox (I marked them as possible members in an attempt at neutrality), but I've added a section mentioning that they'd previously been considered possible lonchodectids. Shuvuuia (talk) 23:43, 30 May (UTC)
OK, so we're clear with Averianov 2020 not being a phylogenetic analysis, but what I've been wondering was that cladogram you made as a replacement. I know part of the sources do coincide with the cladogram, but stating that it's a "composite" just leads to the thought that it's some kind of OR, and none of the refs say that it was a composite. So what I've done is exclude the analysis by Pegas et al and keep the one by Kellner et al, that's because Kellner makes a deeper classification of the group, while Pegas just focuses on Targaryendraconia. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 00:03, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By "composite" I meant "identical to Pêgas et al. 2019, with Mimodactylus added after Kellner et al. 2019". I should have been more clear with that. That said, it bears repeating that the two papers share the same base dataset, so their topologies are largely identical. Kellner et al. 2019 did not "make a deeper classification of the group" - both analyses sample virtually the same breadth of non-lanceodont pterosaurs, Kellner et al. simply shows more in the cladogram in the paper (the full analyses can be found in the supplementary material of each, and they both go back further than what the papers show). If we had to choose one, I'd argue the Pêgas cladogram would be better for at least the Ornithocheiromorpha page due to it having a greater taxon sampling of that clade (the Kellner analysis lacks Boreopteridae entirely and only contains one member of Targaryendraconia, and the only lanceodont it has that the Pêgas analysis doesn't is Mimodactylus). Shuvuuia (talk) 02:25, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want confusion with both cladograms, and there is a section of the analysis of Pêgas that I've missed because it's within the "supplemental area". If you're a new reader for example, and go to the reference, you may not directly find the cladogram. Now that I've seem the "Pêgas cladogram", I'd actually prefer that Targaryendraconia and Boreopteridae are included, even if we have to exclude Mimodactylus, so I should start putting it back? JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 05:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shuvuuia: OK, I've made a cladogram based on Pêgas et al 2019, I've excluded Mimodactylidae, but included Targaryendraconia, Lonchodectidae and Boreopteridae. I've just placed the cladogram on Ornithocheiromorpha (the second cladogram), and practically every other subgroup except Mimodactylidae. Oh, and I apologize for my first reaction on this, though the cladogram I made based on Averianov 2020 was no original research, the refs that come below confused me thinking their linked or connected to Averianov 2020, so I've made a larger cladogram with those classifications included. I know I've mentioned this before, but I just wanted you to be clear. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 06:51, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pteranodontia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages British and Blunt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete DYK nomination

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Nyctosaurus at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 05:45, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pterodactylus

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pterodactylus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Pterodactylus

[edit]

The article Pterodactylus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pterodactylus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Euctenochasmatia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Needle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions (especially on the Pterodactylus)! Afernand74 (talk) 16:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A big Thank You! I really appreciate it! Keep up the good work as well! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 16:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RE: moving sections

[edit]

hi there! apologies about the structural problems i've caused. i haven't quite figured out how to move images yet, so i was afraid to try moving them anywhere else in case i made the issue worse. if there's something wrong with the structure next time i attempt to fix the sections, i'll leave it alone and post something on the talk page instead. thank you :) --Vaporwaveboyfriend (talk) 19:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Vaporwaveboyfriend: No need to apologize, just remember that when source editing (the one with wikitext), if you just put "thumb" to the image, it is placed on the right side of the article by default, and to put the image on the left side, just add a parameter that includes "left". Bear in mind that in articles about living things, there's a taxobox that occupies space, so that also might affect the image placing. Anyway, just keep up the good work, and feel free to ask any questions. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 21:14, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@JurassicClassic767: Thank you! That's actually super helpful! I'll do my best! --Vaporwaveboyfriend (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Species names

[edit]

Could you please revert your changes in several articles where you replaced the valid species name by an old combination, this is incorrect. Thanks! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:34, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jens Lallensack: By species, I meant the original combination of the type species, and the valid species (or new combination) is placed below. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 16:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Type species and valid species are the same. Please revert this! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:45, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jens Lallensack: I'm doing it now, though is it necessary to put "originally (the previous genus it was assigned to; e.g. Megalosaurus)"? This is stated in several articles such as in Majungasaurus. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 16:53, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was a bit too quick, and now see what you mean, my apologies. Maybe we need to change that indeed, but we would first seek consensus at the WikiProject in any case since this affects a larger number of articles. Maybe the variant with the "originally" will be less confusing. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jens Lallensack: So, for now we should just put "originally" to the ones that were previously assigned to other genera then? JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 17:00, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thinking about it, we are not citing the original type species in the taxonbox in the first place, but the current binominal name (you changed it to type species though). In the case of Dilophosaurus, it says Dilophosaurus wetherilli (Welles, 1954). The brackets around Welles, 1954 indicate that he is not the author of the species group name. This is the correct citation I think. I would suggest to just leave everything as is, with changing things in multiple articles that are not obvious errors you almost always step on the toes of people. You can ask of course (as this affects all life taxon articles, the WikiProject:Tree of Life might be the correct place). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind for future changes! And yeah, if it's in parentheses, it means that he/she isn't the author of the current combination, but the author of the first combination for that specific name. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 17:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Koskinonodon and Anaschisma

[edit]

Hello, JurassicClassic 767;

Since you've done the recent work on Koskinonodon and Anaschisma, I thought I ought to mention that the Gee et al. article is available for download at [1]. While the abstract is not entirely clear about the synonymy, the text of the article establishes that the synonymy goes the *other* way, e.g., that K. is sunk into A., and not the other way around. J. Spencer (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@J. Spencer: I have understood it wrong then? So, we would want to resurrect the Anaschisma article, and make the Koskinonodon article a redirect. Actually, when I redirected Anaschisma to Koskinonodon, I've noticed that most (if not all) the article text is text copied from Koskinonodon (or maybe the other way around), so if we want to redirect (or perhaps merge) K. to A., there isn't really much to sort out since practically the whole article info is the same or similar, i.e. it would be an easy merge/redirect. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 08:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think that re-instituting the Anaschisma article and redirecting Koskinonodon to it sounds like the best solution. J. Spencer (talk) 21:45, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@J. Spencer: I've done it finally. Let me know if I have to change something. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 16:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me! J. Spencer (talk) 22:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Pterodactylus

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Pterodactylus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Awsomaw (talk) 00:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature

[edit]

Hi. I noticed a problem with your signature here. Upon investigating, I also noticed that you're aware of the issue. I wanted to mention that, to make your signature safe for use in templates (such as DYK noms), you can fix it in your preferences by replacing that | between your "talk" and "contribs" links with &#124;. Your signature will look exactly the same, and will function correctly everywhere, including on templates. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 19:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mandarax: Thanks, I didn't know there was another way of putting |! I'll change it right away. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 19:35, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ornithocheiridae

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ornithocheiridae you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:01, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Pterodactylus

[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Pterodactylus at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 13:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see new note on your DYK nomination. Yoninah (talk) 22:33, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pterodactylus

[edit]

On 23 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Pterodactylus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the genus Pterodactylus (species depicted), the scientific name for a pterodactyl, had been considered a "wastebasket taxon" as many species were assigned to it and later reassigned? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Pterodactylus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Pterodactylus), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cimoliopterus for FAC collaboration?

[edit]

Hi, I noticed you've had an interest in editing articles about old obscure pterosaurs, and for some time I've thought of expanding Cimoliopterus for GAN and FAC, and thought you might be interested in a collaboration? Could be a good practice for those processes if you want to nominate more articles yourself later. I have also talked to MWAK about this one, and though I know he might not have much time anymore, he's of course welcome to join in any capacity. FunkMonk (talk) 12:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I indeed will not be able to make an important contribution.--MWAK (talk) 06:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@FunkMonk: I sure would like to join a collaboration for a neglected pterosaur article to be leveled up to FA status, or at least GA. I didn't really expect Cimoliopterus for the collaboration, but whatever pterosaur article works for me. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 19:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I thought this one would be cool because though it has a long history, it only received its own genus recently, and is only represented by limited fossils, making it less complicated than many other old pterosaurs. And it has a lot of images too, which is always nice! FunkMonk (talk) 19:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. So, when should we start the collaboration then? JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 19:53, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If there are any sections you'd like to work on, you can begin whenever you want, and there's no rush really, usually we just chip away at articles over some time until it has all the info it needs. And we should be able to gather sources needed even if you don't have immediate access. FunkMonk (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best way would be to just begin from top to bottom (i.e. starting from the history section, and then continuing with the other sections), but of course, we could always try another way. Oh, I've also noticed that Cimoliopterus doesn't have Paleobiology or Paleoecology sections, I think mentioning how the animal fed or behaved, or what animals it coexisted with would be something worth saying? But again, sources may be limited for this. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 20:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There might be something about behaviour in Witton's 2012 book. As for how to proceed, what usually works for collaborations, since it is hard for more than one person to work on a single section, is to divide sections between them. The order it is done has little consequence, so you can just start with whatever you find most interesting. I'd think the best place to start would probably be to add info from the 2013 article that named the genus:[2] The history section will no doubt be the most complex. FunkMonk (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I agree. I was also thinking about the Rodrigues & Kellner, 2013 paper being one of the most useful sources, as you said above. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 20:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

[edit]

You are welcome.

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 15:17, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Heh! Looks funnier than cute. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 15:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah . I just select the one that comes in the middle of the three. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 13:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020 Tree of Life Newsletter

[edit]
Shortcut
September 2021—Issue 016


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Horseshoe bat by Enwebb
Siamosaurus by PaleoGeekSquared
Australopithecus sediba by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Homo habilis by Dunkleosteus77, reviewed by Enwebb
Tatenectes by Slate Weasel, reviewed by FunkMonk

Newly nominated content

Black-and-red broadbill by AryKun
Turtle by LittleJerry
Symphyotrichum lateriflorum by Eewilson
Dracophyllum fiordense by Dracophyllum
Scarlet-and-white tanager by AryKun Viatkogorgon by FunkMonk Punctelia borreri by Esculenta Chivi vireo by AryKun Mountain kingfisher by AryKun Kererū by Ambrosia10

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.


Delivered on behalf of Enwebb (talk) 17:10, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Ornithocheiridae

[edit]

The article Ornithocheiridae you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Ornithocheiridae for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:02, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brontosaurus vs. elephant

[edit]

Hi, just responding to your undo of my edit on the Brontosaurus page re: comparison to elephants. You are correct that I didn't cite a source for the weight of an elephant in tons; I simply converted the article's given (also without citation) weight in kilograms to tons. While I'm an experienced editor, I'm not an experienced Wikipedia editor, and it is clear you are. So I'll definitely concede the point in regard to the deficiency of my edit. All I'd say is the current version also does not cite a source for the height or weight of an elephant, while giving the weight in different units than are given for the Brontosaurus (making comparison difficult when the whole point is easy comparison to an animal people are familiar with). Further, it unhelpfully gives the height at the shoulder of an elephant as something to compare to the total length (head to tip of tail) of a Brontosaurus. (I didn't get around to fixing that one because I couldn't easily find either the shoulder height of a Brontosaurus or the length of an elephant, to bring the measurements into line.) I suggest this needs improvement. Can't help editing (talk) 14:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Can't help editing: Oh, I didn't notice that there wasn't a source for a 6 ton weight, maybe 'cause I just edit quite fast at times. The latter things that you said (the unhelpful comparisons and all), yeah, I totally agree, that should definitely need improvement or something. Another thing that we could do is just remove that unreferenced part, that way, we don't have to find sources or anything, whaddaya think? JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 18:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Diwali!

[edit]
Happy Diwali!!!

Sky full of fireworks,
Mouth full of sweets,
Home full of lamps,
And festival full of sweet memories...

Wishing You a Very Happy and Prosperous Diwali.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:24, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Send Diwali wishings by adding {{subst:Happy Diwali}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

[edit]
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2021!

Hello JurassicClassic767, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2021.
Happy editing,
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 10:57, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

@Fylindfotberserk: Merry Christmas and happy holidays to you too! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 11:25, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 11:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Claws

[edit]
Merry Christmas, and uh, let's hope this image by Durbed doesn't offend anyone... FunkMonk (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 18:20, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, JurassicClassic767!

[edit]
Happy New Year!

JurassicClassic767,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

I forgot to wish you in time. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fylindfotberserk: Thanks! And in your "merry Christmas" message above you already wished me a happy new year, so that kinda works too, right? But yeah, happy new year to you too! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 09:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No man, I had to wish . - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha! :) JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 09:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

False allegations

[edit]

Dear friend, How can someone be protected by others posting false allegations for him? Please advise. There must be a way. Otherwise anyone who has a reason to undermine an individual will be free to do so, unchecked.Thank you Alstamatis (talk) Alstamatis (talk) 22:20, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just patrolling for any vandalism, and saw your edit (where you removed text and a bunch of references, and you just said "deleted false accusations", without providing proof). I don't really know much about that article, but you can discuss it on the talk page. Anyways, do you have any proof that the allegations are false? I mean, it is cited, unless those references don't back up the info. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 23:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JurassicClassic767: That man's username is very similar to the subject of the article he edited, so he may have did it based on personal, but unverifiable information - a violation of Wikipedia rules. I'd say you report it at WP:COIN. Atlantis536 (talk) 03:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantis536: Thanks! I've reported it, so now we just have to wait until someone responds I guess. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 10:16, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copying licensed material requires attribution

[edit]

Hi. I see in a recent addition to Cimoliopterus you included material from a webpage that is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I didn't copy the exact same text as the one in reference, I reworded several of the sentences, as well as changed the order of some other ones. If you want though, I can reword more of the info. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 22:47, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not necessary to re-word compatibly licensed text as long as you provide the required attribution. Here is an example of how to do it. Alternatively you can use the template {{CC-notice}}— Diannaa (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, yeah, but I think I'll still stick to rewording it a bit, just to make it more original, and it also kind of seems more appropriate to me, even though it's not necessary. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 23:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cimoliopterus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Convex.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revue de Paleobiologie

[edit]

Hey there, just making sure you saw this. Some of my pings haven't been going through lately for whatever reason, so you may not have seen my message. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernameunique: Oh, I haven't received any pings from you, but I'll check what you sent right now. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 21:43, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anhangueria, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Basal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you rerate the article about Torre-Pacheco?

[edit]

Good evening JurassicClassic767,

the article about a Spanish municipality named Torre-Pacheco is assessed as start-class, but I think that it deserves a higher class.

The first link shows the site where assessing an article and the second one the criteria for choosing attributing a class.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Torre-Pacheco https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spain/Assessment#Quality_scale

Regards,

--Yolanda95 (talk) 22:31, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Yolanda95[reply]

Since you're a member of the WikiProject, you're free to reassess articles within the scope, just remember, rate the article the rating that fits the best for it, in this case I think Torre-Pacheco should be a C-class. Additionally, you can use a script to make rating articles easier. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 22:58, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JurassicClassic767:I expanded quite the article and I am Spaniard, and that difficults objectivity. Owing to these reasons, especially the first one I prefer other person, not from the country of the article, if possible, to reassess the article. Anyways, I can reassess the article. --Yolanda95 (talk) 07:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Yolanda95[reply]
Oh, yeah, I get what you mean, but apparently, I'm someone who also lives in Spain, so I'm technically from the country of the article as well. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 07:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Tapejaroidea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tapejara.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weird mammalian pterodactyls for you!

[edit]

The weirdest pterosaurs ever drawn? FunkMonk (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, thanks! Imagine if pterosaurs turned out to actually be like this, it'll be oddly impressive I gotta say... JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 22:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need help

[edit]

Hi, would you kindly verify these unexplained changes? Looks POV to me. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 07:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Sorry for responding so late! Yeah, apart from being unexplained, 7 to 7 tons doesn't really make sense, I'll revert the edit now. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 14:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No probs. Thanks!. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Activity at WikiProject My Little Pony

[edit]

Hello, JurassicClassic767. At WikiProject My Little Pony, I'm trying to compile a list of active participants. Your name is currently listed on the active members list and you are active on Wikipedia. Would you consider yourself active on WikiProject My Little Pony? Please {{ping}} me in your reply and see our project talk page for the latest updates. Thanks! Pamzeis (talk) 05:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Pamzeis:, yeah, I haven't edited articles about MLP that much recently, mostly just about maintenance (e.g. fixing dashes, etc.) or reverting vandalism. Does this still count as "active" in the WikiProject, though? JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 18:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I guess I can leave that decision to you but if you feel you no longer would like to actively contribute to MLP articles, I think you would not be "active". Pamzeis (talk) 00:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request Tool

[edit]

Hello, I renamed my script Edit Request Closer to Edit Request Tool a while ago and am now deleting the old page. If you wish to continue to use the script. Please change the link in your common.js to the following:

importScript('User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool]]

Thanks, Terasail[✉️] 21:48, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Cimoliopterus

[edit]

On 29 July 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cimoliopterus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Cimoliopterus was among the first pterosaurs to be depicted as models (pictured) in Crystal Palace Park in the 1850s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cimoliopterus. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Cimoliopterus), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Javelinadactylus

[edit]

Hi. I've noticed you've added quite some stuff from the Javelinadactylus paper, including some phylogenetic results. Where did you access the full paper? I have only seen the abstract. Atlantis536 (talk) 04:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Atlantis536: I think you may have confused my edits with MWAK's? He has been adding lots of info to the article, while I've only done some cleanup. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 05:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You did write that Argentinadraco was a thalassodromine sourced to that paper. Atlantis536 (talk) 05:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantis536: I've begun doubting my conclusion about that since my edit at Template:Pterosauria was only based on the edits of‎ ‎85.246.244.63 at Argentinadraco and Thalassodrominae, to which the IP referenced that study. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 05:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Atlantis536 (talk) 07:09, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

[edit]
The Featured Article Medal
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this special, very exclusive award created just for we few, we happy few, this band of brothers, who have shed sweat, tears and probably blood, in order to be able to proudly claim "I too have taken an article to Featured status". Gog the Mild (talk) 10:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deserved, and therefore:

The Fossilized Barnstar
For your first FA and for being a great collaborator on expanding Cimoliopterus, a rather difficult topic. I hope it will make it easier for you to eventually do a solo nomination one day! FunkMonk (talk) 10:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@FunkMonk: Thanks! There goes my first FA, I don't really know what to say apart from "wow", I guess? Haha... Hopefully someday I get to do a solo nomination if I can! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 10:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion of Cimoliopterus

[edit]
Congratulations, JurassicClassic767! The article you nominated, Cimoliopterus, has been promoted to featured status, recognizing it as one of the best articles on Wikipedia. The nomination discussion has been archived.
This is a rare accomplishment and you should be proud. If you would like, you may nominate it to appear on the Main page as Today's featured article. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Gog the Mild (talk) via FACBot (talk) 12:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove my edit again

[edit]

The raptor family is used to describe birds of prey, dromaeosaurs', and a few other avian dinosaurs. No it is not just an "informal" way of saying dromaeosaur. Drawkingg (talk) 21:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drawkingg: But there's also no scientific group name to designate that exact definition of "raptor family". The "raptor family" basically doesn't exist since "raptor" is just a common name that either means bird of prey or dromaeosaur and related avian dinosaurs. JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 22:18, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 07:33, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cimoliopterus scheduled for TFA

[edit]

This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 11 November 2021. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to comment on the draft blurb at TFA. I suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

[edit]

Hi, there!

Fylindfotberserk (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Fylindfotberserk: Hey man, nice to see you back, we've missed you! Hopefully everything is alright! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 20:33, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks man. I was.. well..busy . Everything was alright. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 20:35, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 018

[edit]
Shortcut
February 2022—Issue 018


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Black-and-yellow broadbill by AryKun
Papuan mountain pigeon by AryKun
List of leporids by PresN
Algerian nuthatch by 2001:4455:364:A800:C13C:8A64:1CEF:F186, reviewed by AryKun
Jungle bush quail by AryKun, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Lycorma imperialis by Etriusus, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Harry Allan by Dracophyllum, reviewed by Esculenta
Banded bullfrog by DanCherek, reviewed by GhostRiver

Newly nominated content

Queen angelfish by LittleJerry
Red panda by LittleJerry and BhagyaMani
List of lagomorphs by PresN
Corsican nuthatch by 2001:4455:364:A800:39A6:A5D8:C903:5E1D
Firefly by Chiswick Chap
Mountain pigeon by AryKun
Bonacynodon by Trilletrollet
Golden eagle by Vaco98

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life/Newsletter/019

[edit]
Shortcut
March 2022—Issue 019


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Queen angelfish by LittleJerry
Alaska marmot by An anonymous username, not my real name, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Firefly by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Afrolychas braueri by OnlyFixingProse, reviewed by An anonymous username, not my real name
Mountain pigeon by AryKun, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Dracopristis by Fossiladder13, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Bonacynodon by Trilletrollet, reviewed by AryKun
Lichexanthone by Esculenta, reviewed by Szmenderowiecki
Yellowtail flounder by Eviolite, reviewed by RecycledPixels
Sexual selection by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by AryKun

Newly nominated content

White-headed fruit dove by AryKun
Mountain pigeon by AryKun
Florence Merriam Bailey by GhostRiver
Agelenopsis pennsylvanica by Kline
Hypericum aegypticum by Fritzmann
Guadeloupe woodpecker by OnlyFixingProse

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter – 020

[edit]
Shortcut
April 2022—Issue 020


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Red panda by LittleJerry and BhagyaMani
White-headed fruit dove by AryKun
List of ochotonids by PresN
Guadeloupe woodpecker by OnlyFixingProse, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Magnetoreception by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Mover of molehills
Macauley Island by Jo-Jo Eumerus, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Black-breasted buttonquail by Casliber, reviewed by Ealdgyth
Florence Merriam Bailey by GhostRiver, reviewed by SquareInARoundHole

Newly nominated content

Black-breasted buttonquail by Casliber
List of birds of Tuvalu by AryKun
List of cingulates by PresN
List of didelphimorphs by PresN
Stegotherium by Larrayal
Resplendent quetzal by SadAttorney613
Electroreception and electrogenesis by Chiswick Chap
Muja (alligator) by Amanuensis Balkanicus
Punctelia graminicola by Esculenta
Siegfried Huneck by Esculenta
Abiogenesis by Chiswick Chap

Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request Tool changes

[edit]

Hello, I just made some significant changes to User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool. Since you have the tool active, I am informing you of this since it may affect you. To open the tool you will now have to click the "respond" button. The tool will load a similar interface as before. There is now a live preview of the response. These changes might have introduced some bugs so if you have any concerns / suggestions or run into problems please leave a note at User talk:Terasail/Edit Request Tool Thanks, Terasail[✉️] 15:33, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Third First Edit Day!

[edit]
Hey, JurassicClassic767. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 19:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! JurassicClassic767 (talk | contribs) 11:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 21

[edit]
Shortcut
August 2023—Issue 021


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Australiformis by Mattximus
Rodrigues night heron by FunkMonk
Titanis by Augustios Paleo
List of lorisoids by PresN
List of storks by AryKun
Brontosaurus by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by The Morrison Man
Eukaryote by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Fritzmann2002
Stramenopile by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Fritzmann2002
Titanoboa by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by SilverTiger12
Antarctopelta by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Anna Blackburne by Kusma, reviewed by Etriusus
Anomochilus leonardi by AryKun, reviewed by Amitchell125
Nyctibatrachus manalari by AryKun, reviewed by Sammi Brie
Mimodactylus by FunkMonk, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Nyctibatrachus major by AryKun, reviewed by Etriusus
Anomochilus weberi by AryKun, reviewed by Etriusus
Plant by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Cessaune

Newly nominated content

Ohmdenosaurus by Jens Lallensack
Polar bear by LittleJerry
Mimodactylus by FunkMonk
List of cercopithecoids by PresN
List of tapaculos by AryKun
Klallamornis by Larrayal
Hypericum perforatum by Fritzmann2002
Holozoa by Snoteleks
Teloschistaceae by Esculenta
Carcharodontosaurus by Augustios Paleo
Nyctibatrachus radcliffei by AryKun
Anomochilus by AryKun


Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 22

[edit]
Shortcut
September 2023—Issue 022


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

List of cercopithecoids by PresN
List of tapaculos by AryKun
Polar bear by Little Jerry
Ohmdenosaurus by Jens Lallensack
Amargatitanis by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Teloschistaceae by Esculenta, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Holozoa by Snoteleks, reviewed by Esculenta
Ashy flycatcher by AryKun, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Nyctibatrachus radcliffei by AryKun, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Carcharodontosaurus by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by SilverTiger12
Life by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Apatosaurinae by Augustios Paleo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
Hypericum perforatum by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by Femke

Newly nominated content

Mountain pigeon by AryKun
List of hominoids by PresN
List of cranes by AryKun
List of tarsiiformes by PresN
Lycorma meliae by Etriusus
Aristonectes by Amirani1746
Animal echolocation by Chiswick Chap
Hyalospheniidae by Snoteleks
Buellia frigida by Snoteleks


Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 23

[edit]
Shortcut
October 2023—Issue 023


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

Mimodactylus by FunkMonk
Mountain pigeon by AryKun
List of tarsiiformes by PresN
List of hominoids by PresN
List of cranes by AryKun
Outline of lichens by MeegsC
Lycorma meliae by Etriusus, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Oak by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Esculenta
Animal echolocation by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Primium
Elke Mackenzie by Esculenta, reviewed by Moriwen
Dwarf pufferfish by Primium, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
Hyalospheniidae by Snoteleks, reviewed by An anonymous username, not my real name
Paroedura maingoka by Olmagon, reviewed by Jens Lallensack

Newly nominated content

Hypericum sechmenii by Fritzmann2002
Teloschistaceae by Esculenta
Nyctibatrachus major by AryKun
List of sunbirds by AryKun
List of platyrrhines by PresN
Handicap principle by Chiswick Chap
Slime mold by Chiswick Chap
Punctelia by Esculenta
Pulchrocladia retipora by Esculenta
Anaptychia ciliaris by Esculenta
Mocquard's Madagascar ground gecko by Olmagon
Zavodovski Island by Jo-Jo Eumerus
Chrysothrix chlorina by Esculenta
Wood-pasture hypothesis by AndersenAnders
Mammalian kidney by D6194c-1cc
Lepas testudinata by Etriusus
Teratoscincus roborowskii by Olmagon


Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

-MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JurassicClassic767&oldid=1241789854"