User talk:Sainsf/May 2016–June 2016

Tim Lokiec

Hi Sainsf. I just rewrote the lead for the Tim Lokiec article, but there's a very interesting AfD regarding this person as it appears he has requested that WP delete his page. I would be more than interested in hearing what WP polices are in regards to that issue as the current discussion (at least to me) is very confusing. Thanks. Picomtn (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I am not very sure on this respect, as it mainly deals with AfDs. I think the views on the discussion page are supported by enough arguments and you can learn from those. Thanks for improving the article. Cheers, Sainsf <^>_{Feel at home} 01:10, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

... for taking on four GA reviews! ... and Precious! I will get to the reviews next week, patience please. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Never worry, you just had to leave me a note, which you have. And Precious will have new recipients everyday. Cheers! Sainsf <^>_{Feel at home} 01:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, and for Precious. I have one in mind for tomorrow ;) - Befreit, DYK. - How do you feel about the cabal of the outcast which stands behind Precious? If you are unafraid consider joining a project proud to have Keilana as a member, an early member even, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:06, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Haha, thanks, joined! I think I will have time just for Precious at the moment, there are many names in my mind! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your courage ;) - and two GAs (anything missing for the fourth?)! - You may want to watch BWV 34 for GAN, need to expand first. - Every time I give Precious I celebrate the photographer (member #1) and the designer (member #2). I don't give it to people who voted oppose in the RfA of #1 and support to ban #2 (although he enjoyed it, - filed under "pride and prejudice" in my 2015 user page archive, there were only few oppose), but you are of course free ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry, I didn't check the last review, now you've four to your name! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Impressed. (Three one day, - I don't think I ever even had two.) - I post articles for review on WP:QAIPOST, also other topics, but not recently, - no time ;) - Feel free to share ideas and values there! Did you see my DYK comment to have a member released from arbcom restrictions (was in the Signpost)? Befreit ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't think your beautiful articles need anything more than some fixes during the GAN, so why spend time elsewhere? You should only if it is an FA. It would be easier if you could give me the link to your comment, BTW I don't subscribe to the signpost anymore. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:21, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps too enigmatic? The article title Befreit (= released) is my comment, article not by me, but nominated in the hope that it might become the appropriate comment ;) - A first: one of my articles was just called for FAR, BWV 4. Before commenting, look that the Easter version differs considerably from the current version. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Really, your comments are cryptic at times, but that's intelligent! So, what are you gonna work on now? I will see if you can review more of your GANs, and I'll drop by your FAC to add a support, hardly any issue there! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:53, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I am working on BWV 34, as said above, - written by several others, conflicts of dates in the sources (1727 vs. 1746, interesting). When you look at my user page, there are red links for both articles and DYK noms. The FAC is Requiem (Reger), no urgency because a different article - also day-related - is already scheduled for 11 May, - we now head for 16 July, centenary of premiere. The problem is BWV 4, - no idea about FAR. I wonder why a user who has good sources doesn't just add them ... - I had a good friend here who died, always said IGNORE IGNORE IGNORE, - created Impact in his memory, or see my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:56, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh, the FAR seems to have been a bit too sudden. I am not much into the topic so I am not sure I can help, seems classical compositions is a lone field for you here? Don't be sad if it is so with you, just read the last few lines of this, a lament, and smile. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand that the FAR is sad mostly for the other author for whom it was the first FA ever and who wrote most of it. It doesn't matter to me any more, actually. It mattered a lot to have it for Easter because I nominated it the day my father died ("death's bonds"), but I am over that. - Facts: you don't have to be an expert in classical music to see that the bolding of BWV 4 (as you saw in all GAs) makes a lot of sense, for different reasons. You can easily see that an article is out of proportion when a large part is taken out. You will understand that searching a page number in a book some other author referenced years ago might be not be worth any time, etc. - I have a Precious candidate for tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:46, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, seems it can not be saved just now. You have enjoyed its significance already (sorry for your father, RIP), perhaps that was it. So that we may not end up awarding two a day (as we did today, nothing bad but every editor, I feel deserves a unique day :) ), I think both of us should take a look at the list to see if anyone was awarded before we go ahead to award someone. Now that you have found someone for tomorrow, let me award someone on May 4. :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:56, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

We'll see about "saved", - it's two weeks, I understand. - About today: I had announced (above) that I had someone in mind. Mine for tomorrow could also be a day later, retired in 2012, but co-author of today's TFA. But today's had to be today's ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Sure, you hand them out as you like, I will check the table before I give someone a pat on the back. :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 02:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Good idea, to check the table first, also to see if the name was there already - which I mention with the date(s), four is the maximum number ;) - did mine today, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Added mine for today :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:11, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gerda, I will be away for the next two days, please award it yourself. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Can you imagine to review BWV 34 during the next five days, or should I ask someone else? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Your articles are short and nearly flawless :) Don't worry, I can take on this. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, nominated for a DYK on Pentecost. The Reger FAC failed, but you could give it a copyedit, - I don't care about the star as much as best shape on 11 May ;) - Precious: today's TFA has 2 (of 4) editors who didn't get it yet, I passed one today, will do the other tomorrow. I see such a thing only when I look at a day's TFA - nice surprise today that it's a friend's article, - another early QAI member! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I can't remember more than 10 editors at a time, I am stunned how you can see an article and recall all its records! No wonder you can track down so many worthy recipients for Precious (I envy you when I say ah-ha, I got today's awardee, and see a Precious on the list of their barnstars! ) , while I have to rack my brains to recall whom to appreciate, or, worse still, pick up random editors and see if their efforts have gone unrecognised! No problem, let's hand out as many as we can, there are hundreds, if not thousands, we have yet to reward. Sorry for the FAC, I will try to give it a thorough read soon. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:01, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

I work much simpler than you seem to think: look at the TFA, go to the talk, click on identified, see four nominators, give "Precious again" to the two who got it before, and Precious to the first who didn't, leaving the other for tomorrow. I have other corners to look when you say you have a day off ;) - you are right: we'll never get to a point when nobody is left without! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

In case you like to review again, - another article by several authors: Höchsterwünschtes Freudenfest, BWV 194. I will begin vacation and be online only at times, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, but I am afraid I am too busy to take on any more reviews at the moment. I should be free by the end of this month. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:30, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Gerda, took a look at Requiem (Reger). The FAC seems to have failed due to such a lot of nitpicking and slow responses. But Stfg's awesome copyedit should have dealt with most of those issues. You could give it another try after a careful re-read, the content is of FA quality though the prose was not at that time. And see what a marvelous recipient we have for today's Precious! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:22, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Four-horned antelope

Hello! Your submission of Four-horned antelope 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) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:13, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Re: Caracal

I can assure you, the source from Mammal's Planet are legit. Most sources I have to edit animal subspecies articles have come from that website, such as scientific names, their names, synonymous scientific names and descriptions as well. Other articles than caracal have Mammal's Planet and Cats of Africa sources.

Even though I admit, I also verify other sources (on google search, books, news and PDF files) to have all information I need for articles, also to make sure the information taken from Mammal's Planet are 100% true and/or if sources found in Mammal's Planet website are also out there. When I see articles have only scientific names, I also take a few animal titles from that website, but on rare occasions.

Still, I will find other sources besides Mammal's Planet for the caracal, as I have plans for creating caracal subspecies articles.--FierceJake754 (talk) 02:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

@FierceJake754: Thank you, the information is not very controversial but, as this is a GA nominee, the reviewer may have a similar question. I hope they understand your explanation, as I have often been cautioned about such sources. And I praise your plan to develop subspecies articles, though there may not be enough content for them, I am afraid. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 02:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I was worried about that too. If I am going to create subspecies articles with much content, I will check everything written about the caracal from reliable sources, involving eight subspecies of certain ranges, physical characteristics, etc. That may be much to do, but I believe it would work out.--FierceJake754 (talk) 03:26, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

@FierceJake754: May be it would be better to work on species articles (I work on any mammal I can find good sources for) than subspecies, which are often not as relevant? Most of them are quite a mess since years, and I have been trying to improve them (I begun with bovids; for cats, I have worked on caracal, jungle cat and cheetah). This field needs considerable work, and it's sad I don't have enough time for it. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

I was willing to do both though; species and subspecies. But you're right. First things first, we will improve the caracal article before I start doing anything else. Also, I found out that Asian caracals (from India) are smaller than the ones in Africa. We can write it down in the characteristic's section.[1] And this may be mere speculation but, considering the map suggests no Gabon caracal live in their region, it may be extinct. But I hope not. I'll go check things out.--FierceJake754 (talk) 03:57, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

You see, there is a lot of stuff out there, but it is best not to include it unless there are one or two reliable, standard sources for it. Let me know what exactly you would like to add, and we will decide what would actually go in. Caracal is already in a good condition now, but Wikipedia is a work in progress, isn't it? :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Of course. I agree too. And also, you did a great job on improving the caracal and the cheetah, and other articles too. :)--FierceJake754 (talk) 22:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

That's encouraging! It's sad that only an editor or two work on mammal articles, while there are hundreds of them to improve. A lone territory. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cheetah

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cheetah 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 Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 04:00, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 GA Cup-Round 3

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Round 3 Hello, GA Cup competitors! Thursday saw the end of Round 2. Sainsf once again took out Round 2 with an amazing score of 996 (a higher score then he received in Round 1!). In second place, MPJ-DK earned an astounding 541 points, and in third place, Carbrera received 419 points. In Round 2, 142 reviews were completed! At the beginning of April, there were 486 outstanding nominations in the GAN queue; by the end of Round 1, there were 384. Another demonstrable way in which this competition has made a difference is in the length of time articles languish in the queue. At the beginning of this GA Cup, the longest wait was over 9 months [2]; at the end of Round 2, the longest wait had decreased significantly, to a little over 5 months.[3] It's clear that we continue to make a difference at GAN and throughout Wikipedia, something we should all be proud of. Thanks to all our competitors for helping to make the GA Cup a continued success, and for your part in helping other editors improve articles. We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 3 so we can keep lowering the backlog as much as possible. To qualify for the third round, contestants had to earn the two highest scores in each of the four pools in Round 2; plus, one wildcard. We had an unusual occurrence happen in Round 2: because only one contestant submitted reviews in one pool, we selected the contestant with the next highest score to move forward to Round 3. (There will be a rule change for future competitions in case something like this happens again.) For Round 3, users were placed in 3 random pools of 3. To qualify for the Final of the 3rd Annual GA Cup, the top user in each pool will progress, and there will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 4th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 3 will start on May 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on May 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 3 and the pools can be found here. Good luck and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Doreen Valiente

Just a quick note to say many thanks for taking the time to review Doreen Valiente. All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:16, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

You are so kind! This is what keeps me going, the love of fellow Wikipedians. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jungle cat

The article Jungle cat you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jungle cat 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 Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Greeting from Natalie in Canada- re your attractive userpage

@Checkingfax: Hi Sainsf. It's me . Top of the afternoon to you from Canada! I love your very attractive user-page. So I was wondering if you would mind if I borrowed some of the code for my own user-page and of course I would give you credit in the Edit Summary and on the bottom of the page, if you wish. I do have a diploma in computer science, albeit a bit dated (although that might mean more than 3 months old ), so I am confident I could honor your original intent. Any answer will be accepted, as long as it's yes ...just kidding of course—feel completely free to object for whatever reason. ...nice communicating with you again. I trust you are well and I hope your studies are progressing as you wish. Natalie Desautels _{…as within, so without} 18:47, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It's a pleasure to meet you again. I am no expert at computer science, I just try out different types of syntax from featured userpages at Wikipedia:User page design center/User page Hall of Fame or any other I come across. A new user, Pixarh tried to copy mine and I had to encourage him/her to think of his/her own ideas. I am not opposed to this, after all I shamelessly nicked this from many other userpages  ! Just try to use different colors, different formatting as you play with the syntax. And Template:Scroll box really helps. But beware that this can take a lot of time to get the desired result. Thanks for your good wishes, and I send you lots myself. (And I envy your new signature ). Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:45, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Cerro Blanco (volcano)

Greetings. Just wanted to make sure, you did look at the other sections of the article? Your comments were limited to the first 3-4 sections.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:03, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes I did, and did not find any issues. There were just a lot of duplinks. Thanks. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 04:23, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

GA Cup-Round 3 Clarification

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Round 3 Hello, GA Cup competitors! It has been brought to our attention that we made a mistake in the last newsletter. In the last newsletter, we said that the "4th place" overall would make the Final along with the top user from each pool. However, the users who will advance will be the top user from each pool along with "4th and 5th place" overall. We apologize for any inconvenience or confusion that we caused. Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caracal

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Caracal 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 Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blackbuck

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blackbuck 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 Shyamal -- Shyamal (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nilgai

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nilgai 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 Shyamal -- Shyamal (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Mahavira has been nominated for Did You Know

Hello, Sainsf. Mahavira, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 17:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For the generous awarding of wikilove to other editors. LavaBaron (talk) 02:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

GA work on various Felidae article

Hi, just wanted to thank you for improving some cat articles lately. Great work! Just one quick question: I had in the past added for every cat species the link to the species portrait on the IUCN Cat Specialist Homepage and saw that you removed them at least for jungle cat and cheetah. May I ask why? I'm sure you know Wiki policies much better than I do, but I thought this would surely be THE external link for cat species? Robuer (talk) 09:31, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes I remember, I found that they were outdated links, I think I forgot to add newer links for them. But don't worry, I have added information from better sources and this source (yes, it is credible but I tend to use books more, and IUCN sources are more helpful on details about conservation efforts) can be added as an external link. I would like to thank you in my turn for helping cat articles, we have only a handful who take care of this field! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 10:16, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for you quick answer. I know they have re-done their whole homepage in 2014 and for that process rewritten the entire content, so all profiles on www.catsg.org should not be outdated. But I leave it up to you whether you want to add them again or leave them away. Cheers, Robuer (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

You may add the new links yourself as external links to the article, they are certainly relevant. Adding them as sources arbitrarily might pose problems. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Done. Added them again as external link. It was never my intention to suggest them as sort of "post-hoc source" for parts of the content. Apologies, if that came over wrong. For me, you may close and remove this short discussion again from your talkpage, if you wish to do so. Robuer (talk) 06:30, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for informing me on this, I am often silly enough to forget adding sources. And no, I'm not at all offended by this, rather, I treat this as a valuable discussion with someone interested in my field (sadly there are only a handful who work on mammal articles). But the most important point here, IMHO, is having the privilege to befriend you :) We need more constructive and sunshiny editors here. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Cheers, likewise :) Robuer (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Klipspringer

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Klipspringer 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 13:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Four-horned antelope

On 14 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Four-horned antelope, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the unusual four-horned skull of the four-horned antelope (illustrated) makes it a popular target for trophy hunters? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Four-horned antelope. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Four-horned antelope), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Am utterly gobsmacked, didn't even realize "Editor of the Week" was even a thing. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

@Shearonink: Hehe, we kept the surprise well! You deserve something like this when you help so many. I remember I used to bother many at the Help Desk in my early days! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:53, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Michael Laucke article nominated for FA status

@Checkingfax: Hi Sainsf...been a while; I trust you are well! I'm delighted that the GA article on Michael Laucke, is nominated for FA status. Checkingfax and myself are the main contributors but, ah, one is never alone . If you'd like to share your viewpoint and help us advance, it's right here. Please feel free to leave comments as you please. warm regards, Natalie Desautels _{…as within, so without} 21:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I am busy in real life this month, I will try to find time for this. Stellar job by all of you! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:54, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caracal

The article Caracal you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Caracal 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 Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Jungle cat

On 15 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jungle cat, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite its name, the jungle cat eschews rainforests and woodlands, and prefers swamps? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jungle cat. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Jungle cat), 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.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK

Hello! Your submission of Caracal 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) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:50, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Klipspringer

The article Klipspringer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Klipspringer 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 08:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Heh, after this review, I finally feel the joy of reviewing GAs again, which was lost during the GA cup. I wasn't sure why it exhausted me so much, but I now realise that reviewing many, long articles about subjects I care little about was the obvious problem, and it certainly didn't help when editors were absent or uncooperative... It just felt like a chore, and I got sick of it... Much nicer now, when I can pick and choose favourite subjects, without having to review the most uninteresting ones just to get more points! FunkMonk (talk) 13:35, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Glad to hear that, the ootaxon review is getting interesting by the day (ahem, I'm shamelessly stalking that). The GA cup seems a lonelier place without you, but I am happy you are free of all that hectic reviewing. It seems to have worked the other way round for me, though. I never knew I could review geography articles as well, a topic I love so much. And I'm amazed at the lot of classical compositions I have taken up, the thing I know of as much as a grasshopper does! Well, nowadays it seems I can have time only for GA reviews, which I hopelessly try to keep away from :) Looks like our ambitious collabs will take time to work out. And hey, congrats for Lesser Antillean macaw, sending anyone next? I may, but not just now... Sainsf (talk · contribs) 14:10, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it was nice to review outside my comfort zone, but when time pressure became a problem, it just became stressful to deal with many of those simultaneously... I have nothing left for FAC now, will have to write it first, and don't have time for that yet! But my next goal would be the bluebuck... Which one are you going for next? Baleen whale was promoted before I got the chance to finish my review (was going to continue yesterday), but I guess it's fine I at least got my say about the taxonomy stuff... FunkMonk (talk) 14:22, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

My next would be Impala, needs a bit more tidying up. And perhaps a co-nom with Cwmhiraeth, Wildebeest, but we haven't talked it over yet. Glad to have you writing again. Let me know how we are gonna fix Bluebuck. A lot of unsourced stuff is there, I think I have exhausted almost every source I have. The ecology section doesn't look very good to me, I will see how we can expand that... Sainsf (talk · contribs) 14:35, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Kenneth Grant

Just a quick message to say many thanks for undertaking the review of Kenneth Grant! Your time is appreciated. Midnightblueowl (talk) 10:09, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts in writing such a piece and your quick response. Did you respond to Valenciano's comments on the review page? Sainsf (talk · contribs) 10:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks! Daniel0816 (talk) 12:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Nothomyrmecia FAC

Hello, I think I did mention this to you in a (excellent) GA review you initiated, and one of the reviewers in the FAC page mentioned something about duplinks and such. Because there was a lot of reorganisation of paragraphs, sentences, prose of course and more, mind having a look to stamp out any duplinks or other possible errors? I wouldn't ask, but you seem to be a professional in that field, a long with amazing reviews. Cheers, Burklemore1 (talk) 05:41, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, I'm no expert at duplicate links as it may seem. You can fix them yourself as per your convenience, just follow the instructions at User: Ucucha/duplinks to get the tool. This will highlight all those words that go to a page that you already have a word linked to (not necessarily the same words, you remember how you couldn't find a second instance of the words in Sphecomyrma?) Please note that you can retain a few duplinks if the last link was quite a while ago or if you feel the term should have a link there (you may keep a link to an anatomical term on Description although you already linked it in Taxonomy, it helps). Take care not to retain too many. I will post a review soon, I love learning about your ants! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:13, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll most certainly use the tool in the future. I do remember the case with Sphecomyrma (and possibly meat ant? Not sure), as long as it goes to different subsection it should be OK. It's always good to see someone who enjoys learning about the ants I work on, it's even better when you see them up in person, knowing there is a comprehensive wiki article about them. :) Burklemore1 (talk) 05:32, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Just finished the review for your FAC. It was really interesting, thanks for initiating me into ants :) Yeah, it would be fun if I could meet up with all of my friends here, there would be no more continents or oceans left! Especially Jimmy Wales! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:12, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm glad! I know that same feeling, but I guess we do need the ocean sort of.... ;) Btw, I have tried to address all of your comments, so please feel free to check. Burklemore1 (talk) 06:36, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Supported :) I would love to take on Green head ant, but I would like to be busy with writing than reviewing now. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:51, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Feel free to take it on at anytime, I doubt anyone will be picking it up anytime soon. Burklemore1 (talk) 11:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

On this note, do you think you need a review more for the ant FAC? I see it already has three supports, which should be enough for it to not be archived. FunkMonk (talk) 11:59, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

All reviews are helpful, so I'm all for additional feedback. You're welcome to leave any if you wish to. It's up to 4 supports now, could be 5 if Josh resumes his review (not sure if he will, refer to his notice) and supports. Burklemore1 (talk) 10:12, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Education in Medieval Scotland‎

Thanks for your work on the GA review for this article.--SabreBD (talk) 10:26, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Cheetah

The article Cheetah you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cheetah 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 Dunkleosteus77 -- Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 22:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your astounding GA reviews on Sphecomyrma, Meat ant, John S. Clark and Nothomyrmecia at FAC, and also for your outstanding contributions towards the mammals that were once neglected here. Your welcoming comments are appreciated by basically every editor too, which goes a long way here! Keep up the excellent work! Burklemore1 (talk) 10:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

On a side note, watch out for William Morton Wheeler on the GA nomination list sometime if you feel like reviewing it. Another renowned myrmecologist, he is perhaps viewed as one of the most reputable scientists to exist that I would like to improve (will be 80 years since he died in 2017). Burklemore1 (talk) 10:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

I am quite overwhelmed, thanks! To tell the truth, which one more good friend of mine agrees with, there are only a handful of our kind who focus specifically on developing the core content of articles related to animals and plants to GA or FA level, while literally thousands await improvement. So appreciation like this among ourselves is indeed encouraging and touches one deeply (and leads to more awesome articles and collabs ). Sure, I can take up short reviews as this any time, it takes less than a day or two to finish them off. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:31, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 25 May

 Resolved Sainsf (talk · contribs) 03:37, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Leopard page, your edit caused an archiveurl error (help) and a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Manky thanks!

Many thanks for undertaking the review of Else Christensen! It's appreciated. All the best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 May

 Resolved Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Serval page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blackbuck

The article Blackbuck you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Blackbuck 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 Shyamal -- Shyamal (talk) 06:41, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nilgai

The article Nilgai you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nilgai 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 Shyamal -- Shyamal (talk) 13:21, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Cheetah

On 30 May 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Cheetah, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that every cheetah (pictured) has a unique pattern of spots on its coat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cheetah. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Cheetah), 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.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Excellent! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 12:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Wildebeest

I have started working on Wildebeest. Do you have access to the article by "Walter Leuthold" that I have just cited (currently #33). I can only see the abstract and that cuts short what looks like some useful information on herd organisation, comparing sedentary and migratory herds. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

I think you mean this one? Here is a Google Books preview [4]. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 12:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, just what I wanted. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:28, 30 May 2016 (UTC)