User talk:LiquidGhoul/Archive 3

Banksias again..and wren

Man, that is an ace photo of the wren. But I digress, as far as cool stuff in your area. Catherine Hill bay, - Flowers Drive just south east of the old church (and about 2-3km north of the village of Catho), there is a windblasted haeth leading down the hill between flowers drive and the ocaen where there are amazing prostrate Banksia spinulosa collina (30cm high and sprawling) that is well worth looking at. I've been there a few years ago and the wohle place is threatened with development. You should get some amazing photos there, and probalby some good bird shots too. cheers Cas

Sorry Evan, I moved your Banksia integrifolia monticola pic to the integrifolia page so as all 3 subspecies are there together. I needed to get a bigger inflorescence closeup on the page. But I figured having the 3 subspp. together looks cool to. cheers Cas Liber 06:35, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

FLC nom

Yeah, advertising the nomination on the relevant wikiproject is always good (and even encouraged, as to avoid situations like this one). Your list has no major issues anymore so a renomination as early as this weekend should do the trick this time. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 12:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

D'oh! Getting used to this stuff - OK am trying signature now. PS: Will get up some more snaps of banksias so you can figure them out. If you see any, let us know and I can ID 'em pretty easy. Also our ASGAP webpage has loads on them... cheers Casliber

Re: Scars

That L. phllyochroa had nothing compared that L.fallax. This is the L. phllyochroa pic.

Litoria phyllochroa with scars

Ascaphus and Cordylus

The frog could definitely be Ascaphus, but it's hard to tell. It could be a Leiopelmatid, and I don't know how to tell them apart unless you see the "tail" in the males. Usually this isn't a problem because Ascaphus are N. American, Leiopelmatids are from New Zealand.

The lizard is definitely a Cordylid, but I've never seen these guys before and would have no idea where to start with the species ID.

Sorry it took me so long on the Ascaphus ID, things are crazy these days. Pstevendactylus 02:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

l. latopalmata page

I was wondering why you changed the image order around, I just wrote up a section on the spawn and tadpoles to go with the new photo and thought that it would be more logical to have the egg photo under that same heading as that paragraph and to have the frog under the description heading.--Tnarg 12345 10:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Santa Cruz hands photo

Done. Mariano(t/c) 06:09, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Distribution Maps

Where did you get the map of Australia from for the White's Tree Frog article? I want to make some distribution maps for some of the Australian frog articles, however I need a base map to work on.--Tnarg 12345 07:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.--Tnarg 12345 08:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Moss Froglet

Looks like were heading for another taxonomy discussion on Australian frogs. This time the Moss Froglet. Whether it belongs in Crinia or its own genus Bryobatrachus. I know that the majority of the sites that we use for taxonomy class this frog as being in Crinia, however this frog is often classed in its own genus. Tadpoles of South Eastern Australia by Marion Anstis classes this frog in its own genus, as well as the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife webiste (this is probably worth considering seeing it is a Tasmanian species), when I went up to Hartz Mountains (the discovery site) in Tasmania there were a few signs, all calling this frog Bryobatrachus nimbus. The reasons for it being in a different genus than Crinia are pointed out very clearly in the tadpole book, the tadpole development is completely different from all other frogs in Crinia. You probably know this but this species eggs (total of 4-16) are laid in moss nests and tadpole development is entirely terrestrial. No frog in Crinia comes even close to this form of development. In fact the only tadpole pointed out in the book as being remotely similar to this species is Assa darlingtoni, and that species is not (although once was) classed in Crinia. No other genus that I know of shows so much difference in embryo and tadpole development.--Tnarg 12345 06:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The classing of Bryobatrachus nimbus back to Crinia from my interpretation of the paper seems like unlucky timing. Basically because Rounsevell described the differences between the Moss Froglet and the genus Ranidella so when Ranidella was merged into Crinia it meant that the differences between the the Moss Froglet and Ranidella (which then became Crinia) were no longer valid. So according to the paper taxonomically Bryobatrachus and Crinia are currently the same, basically because no one has gone and repeated the work of Rounsevell but this time between the Moss Froglet and the genus Crinia. So the Moss Froglet at the moment can't be considered in its own genus. I guess that on wikipedia it sould still be left in Crinia, however when someone gets around to writing the article for the Moss Froglet (I would do it but I have exams all this week and don't have much time) it should be made clear that there are very strong differences between this frog and the rest of the Crinia genus and the synonym of Bryobatrachus nimbus should be in the taxobox, also it is probably worth noting that on the Crinia page.--Tnarg 12345 10:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I haven't read the paper yet, but what was the "thing" that prompted them in merging Bryobatrachus back into Crinia. Froggydarb 11:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Arenophryne

Something is wrong with the Arenophryne link on the Myobatrachidae, I'm not sure how to fix it. Could you please have a look at it. Thanks. Froggydarb 07:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Doesn't matter it's alright. Froggydarb 07:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Megistolotis lignarius vs. Limnodynastes lignarius

Here we go again...Should the Carpenter or Woodworker Frog be in the Limnodynastes page or should it have its own as Megistolotis lignarius. Until recently I had never even thought that this species had been considered in Limnodynastes until I saw it on the Limnodynastes page and here, here and on AMNH. However the Northern Australian Frogs Database classes it under the monotypic genus Megistolotis. Physically this species is quite different to other Limnodynastes, as with this species the tympanum is very distinct and in Limnodynastes the tympanum is indistinct. I was wondering if you have any papers on the work of Schauble, Moritz and Slade (2000) that justifies the moving of the species from Megistolotis to Limnodynastes.--Tnarg 12345 06:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Whites Tree Frog

Evan,

First and foremost I commend you on taking the time and effort to write an article.

I'm also in Newcastle. I'm aware of how Wikipedia works, but personally I'd rather let the creator take ownership of major edits of the page. I honestly don't have time to rewrite or substantially edit articles, but I'll help whenever I can.

As a warning, be very careful of what you read on the web regarding Australian frogs. Most of it is crap that has been transferred out of US pet keeping books by college students who needed to write an article as part of a course.

There are very few good books on keeping Australian frogs. Much of the info refers to similar species imported from New Guinea or Indonesia. Ones by Bartlett or de Vosjoli are among the better ones.

The White's Tree Frog article needs a fair bit of work, but much of the correct information can be found in a book by Tyler called "Frogs as Pets". Try to track down a copy, if you're unsuccessful email me privately. Another good one for some trivia on GTF's is a journal article by Tyler and Dobson that deals with the type specimens of Litoria caerulea (Herpetologica 29(4), 373-375). Did you know that King Louis XVI heard of the "blue" frogs and sent an expedition to Australia to bring some back? Or that although the description is credited to John White (the ship's surgeon on Cook's Endeavour), it's most likely it is the work of Shaw on a specimen collected by Joseph Banks? Twenty years elapsed between the specimen's collection in 1770 and it's description in 1790.

FWIW, I've had GTF's on and off for 35-odd years, and they are by far and away my favourite frog. I've written a few articles for newsletters and websites regarding frogs, especially GTF's, and would really like to help make yours a truly superb and accurate article.

I do have some photo's of frogs. What species or poses were you after?

Cheers,

Steve

Stevew139 01:40, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Evan,

$40 for Tyler's book is extortion, and definitely not value for money. I bought it for about $15 five or six years back, and thought that excessive, since I already had most of the info. But since I collect books on Litoria caerulea, I had to have it.

You may not have noticed but the small frogs in the centre of the "blue frogs" painting are Crinia signifera, so you may want to add a viewing link at some stage to the Crinia article.

Best of luck with your exams, I'll leave you alone after this. When your exams are over I look forward to doing some editing.

Regards,

Steve

Stevew139 06:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

List of amphibian families

Yeah, that list was just something basic I did to fill in one of the red links on the WP:AAR page. I just made it in the same format as the List of reptiles, you can do what ever you want with it.

Cheers. Froggydarb 08:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Family maps

I just finished my exams on Friday, so I have some more time on my hands. I should be able to do some of the family maps, but I would need a reference to work off-do you have a website where I would be able to get an idea of the distribution of each family?--Tnarg 12345 02:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll have a go at a few as well. Froggydarb 02:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I did the map for the Leiopelmatidae family, however the distribution is very hard to see even in full resolution, should the image be cropped to just NZ or should the distribution be pointed out or circled?--Tnarg 12345 08:33, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Images on Amphibiaweb

I noticed that it says that the photos on amphibiaweb can be used as thumbnails under fair use license on this page. It also says that larger images can be used with permission. I know Dr. Jean-Marc Hero (I am working with one of his students on a wallum frog project) and he is the author of over 150 photos on that website (many are photos of frogs that are difficult to get photos of). I could ask him for permission to use these photos on wikipedia. Do licenses on wikipedia cover this types of images usage?--Tnarg 12345 03:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

"the choice of the editors of the article"

Remember that anyone can edit Wikipedia articles - people don't own them. See WP:OWN. I see the point with specific names (capitalise Great White, don't capitalise shark). But that just confirms the platypus article is wrong to capitalise. If you read it, notice it's not even consistent itself. So do you mind if I edit your article now? Proto||type 06:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

littlejohni

Me and user:froggydarb were out at Darkes Forest tonight, it's the only site near Sydney where they are, we had been planning on going out there for a while but we waited until after the rain which fell this week. There is also littlejohni around the watagans which is closer to newcastle.--Tnarg 12345 14:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

There wasn't just 1 or 2 either, there was at least 10 calling. Froggydarb 14:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised you haven't heard of Darkes Forest before, its probably one of the best frogging sites near Sydney, with something like 22 species of frogs. Normally we go to another part of Darkes forest, however we were looking for littlejohni last night so we had to walk something like 6kms total when it was like 5 degrees when we finally heard something calling we found they were calling from a creek, which was actually quite deep and all the frogs were on the opposite side of the creek from us, so I had to wade out in freezing cold water just to get one. But it was worth it, I had never seen one before that night (even though I had attempted to find them before) and I did get a call recording at close range to the lot of them. We only found 1 other species, I'm sure you could guess what it was, however they were mostly calling from a small dam near the start of the walk, and I think there was only 1 calling from were we got the littlejohni's.--Tnarg 12345 22:04, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Range maps

The maps on the Bombinatoridae (map is there but it can't be larger then it's current size), Littlejohn's Tree Frog and Jervis Bay Tree Frog pages don't appear in the taxobox, a link is given instead. Do you know how to fix the problem?

Thanks. Froggydarb 06:25, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

family maps

If you, me and froggydarb are all going to work on the family maps we should probably co-ordinate it so that none of us are working on the same family at the same time, as it would waste a lot of time and effort if we discovered that someone has just finished a map of a family at the same time that someone else was working on. Can you suggest any sort of system for this?--Tnarg 12345 09:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I striked out the ones that have been done, I also left a similar message on user:froggydarb's page.--Tnarg 12345 10:14, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Should the family maps only be based on native distribution? ie. if Bufonidae was going to be worked on you wouldn't include the area inhabited by the Cane Toad in Australia--Tnarg 12345 11:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I thought it would be best to only include native distribution, as it would get ver complicated with some species.--Tnarg 12345 11:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Platypus

I don't understand why Platypus should not be capitalised. It is a specific name, there is only one Platypus

No, a platypus is a type of animal, like a cow, or a mouse, or a bear. The fact there is only one specific species of platypus doesn't mean it's a special case that overrules grammar. Proto||type 10:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

congrats

Nice to see Cane Toad promoted! Cheers. Tony 07:48, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm very pleased to see that the 2a page and associated exercises—an experiment on my part—might be useful. Thanks for your feedback. Tony 01:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Australian Froglist

Yeah I have a pic of an Assa. I am thinking of writing something in the intro (of the froglist) before I upload it though, should be up by the weekend. Froggydarb 21:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

The list is up, can you have a look at it and make sure everything is correct. Thanks (just need to make a few more distribution maps) Froggydarb 03:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Would you think it is possible to get the Taudactylus image off this page and upload it?

Where on the page does it say the image is copyrighted, I know that down the bottom it says that "All journal content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License". That is the same as the L.gracilenta pic off Flickr.

Vocal Sac

I have a pic of a L.chloris with a fully inflated vocal sac if you want it for the page. My only concern is that the page would then become a bit cramped. This is the link. Froggydarb 09:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Stubs

Agree these are not now stubs, I have now removed them. Probably weren't to start with. Cheers GrahamBould 17:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Good Work

Amphibian Barnstar

Seeing that we have these barnstars I think you deserve the Unofficial Amphibian Barnstar for all the hard work you put into getting Cane Toad and List of Anuran families to featured status. Not just me, but I'm sure everyone else from WP:AAR think that you deserve this. Good Work!--Tnarg 12345 06:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Cane Toad

I thought I saw something about Cane Toad golf and reverted it using popups. I am not very capable of American English but perhaps I didnt use popups right while reverting it ! Congrats on getting this to Featured level. Shyamal 05:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

National Parks

Yep, that sounds like a good idea. I was up at the Wollemi a few weeks ago and I will be back up there in July, so I have some (and plan to get more) photos. You may have noticed my Colo River photo, that was up at the Wollemi, the river was very low at that time, I've been up there a few times and that was the lowest I've seen it.--Tnarg 12345 10:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I do Duke of Edinburgh's Award expeditions up there, unfortunately they are always during winter so I don't get to do much frogging and I've only found Crinia signifera up there.--Tnarg 12345 11:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I Think our best bet for some good information on the Wollemi would be the Wollemi National Park - plan of management. It's 75 pages long so it's got to have something useful in it.--Tnarg 12345 21:32, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I saw on Tnarg's talk page that you are going to Dorrigo. Would you be going frogging because I know a few sites that I could tell you, one of them was where the Assa pic was taken. Froggydarb 05:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

"Eucalypt dominated open forests comprise 90% of Wollemi National Park, with over 70 species of Eucaplypt recorded. The remaining 30% of the National Park is comprised of rainforest, heath and grassland." Which is it? 90 and 10 or 70 and 30? I want to check with you first before anything gets changed.--Tnarg 12345 08:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that a list of threatened species for the Wollemi article might be a good idea. I was going to write out just a few examples, until I did a search and discovered how many there are. What do you think?--Tnarg 12345 08:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Dorrigo

Yeah it might be a bit late, but I went there in April (wasn't all that cold) last year and found 9 species. I'm most likely going there this Christmas.

As for the sites; I only went to 2 sites when I was there, the Assa site is on the Rosewood Walking Track that starts at the Never Never picnic area in Dorrigo NP (not the Never Never State Forest). I heard them calling all along the track but only found them (in the day) at the end of the track (the part of the track that heads southish (starts off with gum forest, not rainforest) out of the picnic area).

I found the Mixophyes (iteratus and balbus) along with L. barringtonesis (the photo on the barringtonensis page, what ever it might be), Lech. fletcheri and L. wilcoxi in Cascade National Park (it was called Wild Cattle Creek State Forest, about 20km north of Dorrigo) at Mobong Creek a couple of kilometres north east out of Cascade on Moonpar Forest Drive (Sorry, it is Moses Rock Road not Moonpar Forest Drive) (the creek has a picnic area next to it). All the other species I found were at the place I was staying.

You probably already do, but remember to disinfect your things, especially your shoes if you go to more than one site there. Last time I was there I was talking to one of the National Park ranges and he said that there was chytrid in Dorrigo NP and the surrounding areas.

Hope that helps.

Cheers. Froggydarb 06:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Image:35509749 913878ce39 b.jpeg listed for deletion

Yeah that is fine. Sorry, I just saw that it was Creative Commons and thought I should upload it. But is'nt commercial purposes just to make money? Wouldn't the lisence apply what ever website it is on? Even if I am wrong it doesn't matter, I'll just have to get a pic myself :) Thanks for the notice. Froggydarb 08:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

a rheobatrachus image

Do you think it would be possible to claim fair use of a Rheobatrachus image? I know that we can't just go grabbing every image and claim fair use, but realistically it is going to be very difficult to encounter a new free image or for someone to get a new image of one. Rheobatrachus frogs are very important animals and I think an image could add some value to the article. Does wikipedia have policies on images of "extinct" animals? What do you think we could do?--Tnarg 12345 11:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think the next step then would be to ask someone who is an administrator and see what they think.--Tnarg 12345 21:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

redirects

Sorry about that, I was going to get around to it tonight, until I realised that you had fixed them all. I'll make sure I fix the redirect as soon as I have moved the page in the future. Also you may have noticed that the Green frog is the last one that needs to be moved, however Green Frog already redirects to that page, so it won't let me move it. Do you know how to get around that problem?--Tnarg¹²³⁴⁵ 09:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

FYI: stable version of frog

I put a stable version of frog at frog/Stable. I used the old version which had the FA tag applied to it. We could alternatively use the version at the beginning of the day when it was featured. The idea behind it is to lend proof of principle to discussions at Wikipedia talk:Stable versions. Let me know your thoughts! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 14:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Image request

Hi, would you have the opportunity to get some pics of emu eggs or feathers by any chance?--Peta 05:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for trying. You didn't get any pics of the Quolls did you?--Peta 08:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool, Quolls are on my list of to do animal articles, an we are short on pics.--Peta 08:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thanks for supporting my RfA, and good luck with yours!

This will get very robotic as I go down the list of 74 votes...

Samsara (talk • contribs) 16:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

βρεκεκεκὲξ κοὰξ κοὰξ,
λιμναῖα κρηνῶν τέκνα,
ξύναυλον ὕμνων βοὰν
φθεγξώμεθ’, εὔγηρυν ἐμὰν
ἀοιδάν.
(Aristophanes, Batrachoi [1])

• Congratulations to your adminship from all the frogs of the over- and underworld! -- Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I can't beat the frog congratulations which is very apropos, but I'll give mine anyway since it's official! Make sure to be conservative with the new tools and re-read policy before taking action. Other than that use the new tools for good and continue to help make this a better place. Have fun, and again, congratulations - Taxman ^Talk 12:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats. Now we just need to find a frog and make it an admin. :) pschemp | talk 13:36, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Or a prince. Congrats as well. ++Lar: t/c 14:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Good to see you being promoted. I also look forward to collaborating again some time. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 14:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I echo the comments of those above (although, contra Taxman, I think you ought to act liberally, arbitrarily, and capriciously with the new tools); I didn't vote in your RfA, but only because I usually only participate where the outcome I support doesn't already command a consensus. On a different note, Image:Superb fairy wren2.jpg is absolutely amazing; good on ya for that... Joe 01:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats mate, I believe you will make a fine admin. Cheers--Tnarg¹²³⁴⁵ 05:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats on your successful RfA. Froggydarb ^croak 06:06, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Dafni

First of all, I don't consider the move legitimate, as it was not listed on WP:RM, the opinion of me as contributor was not taken into account, and because the article covers the pagan temple as well as monastery. Secondly, the move was effected in a hasty and sloppy way, leaving only one link from Dafni (disambiguation) still leading to Daphni Monastery. This amounts to orphaning an important article and to drowning it in the sea of gratuitious red links. It's true that I later changed template to point to the right page, but I still fail to find a rationale for piping the redirect. I believe our readers arriving to the page about Daphni Monastery (which is by far the most important meaning of the term) may follow link to Dafni (disambiguation) provided at the top, if this article is not what they seek for. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 11:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I indeed have little interest in the issue. Given that I contributed 700 or 800 articles, I cannot follow discussions concerning all of these, let alone the articles where I was not the only contributor, as was the case of Daphni. Otherwise, I would have to leave my proper paid job to discuss my articles with casual editors who have little else to do. If I see crazy proposals on talk pages, I prefer to remove the article from my watchlist and not to think about it again. It's a pity for the article not for me. Cheers, Ghirla ^-трёп- 12:44, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for copyedit

Thanks for the copyedit at tuatara. I ran into an edit conflict and had to revert and then merge your changes, but it's done now and I'm not doing any more on the article tonight. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 00:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Arutz Sheva Israel National Radio

Please see the bottom of my talkpage at User_talk:Daniel575. --Daniel575 23:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Page move request

While reading Joel's talk page, I noticed your comment about the page move request at 2001: A Space Odyssey (film), so I dropped by and voted oppose. That's seems to make it a 6:5 count for the move. So no longer 60%. Anyway, percentages with such small numbers voting is a bit silly. The difference in number of votes seems more important here. Only one vote now separates the two sides. Carcharoth 01:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Snapper chrysophrys aurata

I hate those cite templates. Maybe if they didn't come out looking so pedantic. (The way the web one used to be "URL retrieved on" was especially stupid.) I think I might put back what I wrote. -- Kevin Ryde 01:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Silicon Valley of India

Hi there. Could you please reopen the Silicon Valley of India move discussion, to give it more time to generate discussion and consensus? I don't think people are going to discuss it on each other's talk pages (awkward without a central page). The request for moves page also says that if no consensus has been reached, the discussion can be left open. Thanks. Bwithh 04:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Tuatara

That's cool. I've rephrased some of the sections you queried. I also contacted someone (name not revealed here for privacy, but you can probably guess) who is an authority on tuataras, and this person said they would look at the article and help to provide citations. It may be a few more days before they get around to this. We should endeavour to get the non-trivial references sorted fairly quickly now, so their effort can be spent on the ones we couldn't easily find. I think the FA prospects are good. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Nematode

Sorry, I may have been a bit snappy in my reply to your comment on the nematode. I was just trying to give a simple comparison in the previous comment, but I was in a hurry and a bit miffed when I wrote the reply to your paragraph on metamorphosis.

I have studied zoology at Uni, so didn't need the lesson on metamorphosis, but you're not to know that. BTW, I had a quick look at the Cocoon (silk) article, and it says that that term does not refer to butterflies anyway; for butterflies it is specifically a Chrysalis. So looks like my simple comparison wasn't quite right anyway.

Thanks for trying to help. I too would like someone who really does know to clear this up. --jjron 08:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Portal did you knows

This was probably just forgetfulness on your part, but if you could archive old items when you update the did you knows, that would be great! Cheers. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 08:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia

The preface to mine is written by Halliday and Adler, the editors. There is no "introduction" to the book, and Cogger does not appear as a contributor. So it seems that your encyclopaedia is somewhat different. I guess that's an advantage. :) - Samsara (talk • contribs) 11:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks, it was heaps of fun. I did lots of walking and about 9kms of canoeing. I got quite a few photos, mostly landscapes and photos of the Colo River, I may end-up uploading a few of them. Not much in the way of frogs though, only a few Crinia signifera, but it was quite cold. Cheers--Tnarg¹²³⁴⁵ 05:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)