Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Turtles/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Turtles

Several weeks ago, I proposed this project at the above page. In total, six established editors agreed to join. Here's to collaboration!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk template

Template:WikiProject Turtles needs creating. Similar to Template:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. I'm the worst at this sort of stuff.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

So are we sure about having our own template. Would we have AARTalk and Turtles tagged on the talk page? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 06:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I suppose so, because we want to rate their importances differently...right?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I believe you can either add a second tag or add turtles as an option in the existing AAR tag. The first way is simpler to do but the latter way seems neater but I don't know how it's done. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 08:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
That would be nice, similar to this one that you showed me a while ago? Template:WikiProject Canada.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Recc one of many

Get that teacher fellow to take the terrapin to FA/GA or whatever. It has a high cultural significance and he is raring to go on it. Heck, they could even work a field trip in and snap pics or the like.

Then get some other teachers to do the analagous for more turtles. Pitch them on how turtles are tailor made for the classes. Heck. Get the slider done. They can even order them and cut them apart instead of fetal pigs. Sure there are a gazillion animals, but if you are pitching them and reaching out to them, they may want to go with you instea of bats or whatever.TCO (talk) 04:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

We'll hope the ones being cut up are a) captive bread and b) already dead.  :-P I'll point my old teacher in the direction of this page. There was one other teacher who started something similar, I'll drop him/her a note as well. Thanks TCO!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
What about all the other classes in the country? If you could even get 5 of them to join, you would have a wiki Army. I mean if you thought it was a good experience, how to pitch it to others?TCO (talk) 05:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Harumph. Let me think about this. I think we could write a letter or come up with some structure or whatever to welcome people. Sure, the teachers can just emphasize the books, or human physiology or other animals, but if you are pitching it to them, and have even some tiny structure to welcome them (more than the wikirodents or whatever) then they will go with you first. Hmmm...this is how my devious asskissing goes...TCO (talk) 05:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, the reason my teacher started that project was to replace the AP Biology research paper that so many teachers assigned their students. Could promote it as a replacement for the physical paper so many kids have to write.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah...I think that is powerful. There are some teachers who will want the traditional, but all you need is a subset of the thousands of classes in the country and you are set. Get the ones who are willing to try something. I mean look at that activity log on the hot articles tool Sunny did. It's not like there are that many people editing. Just get 5 classes and you will be Genghis Kahn of animal articles. I think if we can tap your and that teacher's experiences and present a few of the plusses for doing the new fangled approach, then you'll get some teachers. That plus a little bit of involvment and support. I mean, no way you have time to hold their hands. But even just a teensy amount of acknowledgement. Would mean a lot. Then third aspect is if you can honestly (or convincling lie) say it was postive for you, then so be it! That's enough to get some people to buy the program...TCO (talk) 05:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Here's that other project: Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology Bapst 2010. There's been some question of it's validity though, you can check the talk for the head editor, leave him a note. And haha, the project really was a great experience. XD The only thing left to do is find out which editors teach AP Biology.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Lfstevens seems to have the right idea: User:Lfstevens#Articles that need a lot of work that students could perform while learning about the subject!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:32, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Goals and ideas

I think there should be some clear goals. I'd like to suggest that goals are:

  • There is an article for all turtles in the current Turtle of the world checklist have an article.
  • That some criteria for assessing importance scale and quality scale is agreed on and put clearly on the WP:TURTLES page so anyone passing(even none members) can do it without having to ask.
  • Aim that all article are tagged and assessed for the project.

And ideas of:

  • Create a list of most promising articles that could be taken to GA or FA.
  • That a section on the WP:TURTLES is for requesting photos.
  • A membership userbox
  • Have a bot create Wikipedia:WikiProject Turtles/Popular pages
  • Work together on some WP:DYK's so that a few articles can get the front page in the Did you know spot. Articles prose has to expand 5 times to min 1500 words in 5 days.
  • Keep in touch with AAR.

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 05:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Fantastic. I'll work on a userbox and a section for photos. We can discuss here the way in which importance should be decided upon. Also, I'll try to think of more ways to hark back to AAR.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've been pushing the AAR thing, glad to hear others feel same. I don't know much about DYKs, but I think they might be powerful to get some easy wins and motivation. Really support that! Other ideas from previous stuff (sorry little vague), I love the tool that SunC showed with hot articles. Also the tool that you showed with the hit count for the article. I think "going where the market is" is valuable. Like SunC said there are WAY more articles out there, than can be accessed. Obviously, first prioroity should be "fun" to drive editing. But I think working on the more popular stuff ends up being fun. Plus it really helps mre people, gets seen by more visitors.
Yes, and I think first priority is to get a talk page template and try to get it on every (okay, maybe not every) talk page. That should be a big help. Also, one of these: Wikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles/Assessment...but with turtles.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Included image/map section, feel free to reword, I doubt I hit every point necessary.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I would break image and map in two in discussion. People have a hard time taking info in when glommed together. Each is significant, and as is almost look like you expect some infobox with image and map side by side. Love the specificity and effort on the content, though.TCO (talk)
sweetTCO (talk) 07:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, and I cleaned it up a bit (grammar goes downhill fast after midnight). :-P--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Members join date

Can I suggest the date is left on. Most projects show the date and it's useful after a while to see the new members and those that are inactive. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 05:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, perhaps we can have people put it manually though: something like (02/01/2011), just so that all the commas and colons and "(UTC)"s get left out.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I put one by my name, I think it's okay, could be better, let me know what you think.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Mwahahaha

I'm gonna do a GA/FA on turtle racing.  :) 05:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good project member!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
At an FAC review there could be some critics regarding the need for an article on the subject. i.e "Why is this theme encyclopedic, and not just trivia? Given the references (no books on Google about turtle racing), it seems no one has bothered to publish some work dedicated to this subject, so maybe this is just a collection of trivial information?" Regards, SunCreator (talk) 08:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I think this was a little joke, but I could be wrong, maybe the man's serious about his turtle racing. :-) --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I was totally joking, and I actually agree with SunC that the encyclopedia is better served with articles about other things. That said, if you provoke me.  :) And it really is something that goes on in towns all over the Midwest every summer and has for many years. There are plenty of news articles on it, and it's mentioned in Gamble (that harvesting supplies it). Also, look at all the other junk they let get through FAC. Some of it pretty random stuff (individual congregations, streets, very obscure politicians, individual hurricanes that never hit land, etc.), with a lot lower google ranking than "turtle racing" at 500,000 hits. It's really sort of a quirky minor cultural phenomenon in the middle of the country.
P.s. It is hitting the bars, lately. TCO (talk) 09:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I guess it is pretty popular. Could definitely see it being GA.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 09:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I thought it was joking also but not quite sure, it is a gorgeous picture after all ;) Was saying upfront so that effort is not applied to try an make it to FA only later to discover problems, I watched Swindle (chess) hit a roadblock, and would not like to see that happen again. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Userbox

How about something like this:

This user is a Turtler.

--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Like it!TCO (talk) 06:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Name? {{User Turtles}} perhaps? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 07:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Sure, alter it anyway you see fit. It was just a mock-up on my part. Can also change the color if you want, I don't much like this one.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
This is done using the standard userbox so the image is on the left side. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh, okay. Good for future reference, thank you.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Extinct

"This WikiProject aims to expand organise Wikipedia's collection of entries about turtles, both living and extinct." Given that Wikipedia:WikiProject Extinction exists. Can I challenge you to name two turtle species that have been extinct for over 500 years of any importance? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 06:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Was really just covering myself because I knew there were a couple out there (our navbox mentions one), and Clemmys also has a few (I think), give me a minute...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
most important one Proganochelys but also of course Meiolania, but thats not fair since I named two fossil species, Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 06:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Maybe that's what I was thinking of...fossil species. Will alter wording. Thanks! --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
There are many red links on Cryptodira. I tried to find a reliable source for them at one point but gave up. Are there going to be sources to create these articles? It's something I would leave to others. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 07:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
there are some for Pleurodira as well, those are all various fossil taxa, like all groups there are many more extinct forms than living, the Chelonia have a 210M year fossil record. I would focus on living forms first, the fossils are very complex and will require a lot of hunting down of original descriptions and reviews in highly specialised journals, much of it is not in English either as a number of those groups are from South America and are in Portuguese and Spanish, others are in French. There are no reviews of these taxa in generalised books, this will be a hard job to track all these down. I have a lot of the papers and can get others, I know many of the scientists who described those species. My suggestion prioritise living forms, then well documented fossil forms then worry about the difficult ones. For example the Famuily Carettochelydidae has 20 odd species in it from all over the world, but only one living species. Cheers, Faendalimas (talk) 07:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
These fossil species will be a big part of this project. If a list could be drafted up it could be included in the 'To-do' template. Articles that need creating and expanding. Thanks again, --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I can do a list of fossil forms, but it will take me a little time. I have a lot of the data. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Great, and if you have an internet source and need some help, your brothers are here. :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

"Resources"

Not 100% sure what this section is for, but I thought we could include some links to our best literature?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Lokking at other projects I would include a list of information sources, primary, secondary and web, and also any useful tools available. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 07:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool, I think that should be a big help for future members.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Recc to add some of the Ernst sources. At least the 2009 one. Doesn't matter that it is not web-based. Still great resource. (I would, but not sure how.) Also, I think there is a competing turtle almanac by Conant. Also some field guides. Probably US one at least (yes it's not globabl, but it's a big country and where most of your readers and writers are from. If you figure out a European one later or the like, it can be added as well.) Consider some of the general reptile almanacs as well. Don't add too much, but pick the best. Will help people.TCO (talk) 19:04, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
What I was thinking about doing is putting the exact bibliographic citation for the most current Ernst, Carr, and a few others (we already have Rhodin and Fritz).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, add the key ones. We can always figure out how to organize them later (web versus print, NAM versus global, etc.) but get them in there. Also, push yourself a little to think if missing anything substantial. I know Ernst is the Isaac Newton of this field, but let's make sure we don't miss a Leibnitz. We probably also want to add a little commentary (like source X is useful for issue A) but that can come later as well.TCO (talk) 19:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, good thinking. I'll look back at some journals/books I used and include them. And I'll draft something up depending on what I find. Thanks!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:46, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Category:Turtles

Seems like there should be more articles listed at the bottom...no?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure. The logical behind categories is not something I yet understand. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 08:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Okay, We'll figure it out. Maybe they have to be manually added (but I don't think they do...).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Think they are there in one of the subcategories (i.e a family). You can drill down to the articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 09:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh yeah, okay, some are. It still appears to be a mess though. For instance, bog turtle is under 'turtle,' not 'emydidae.' But sorting that out's for another day (or maybe week!).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 09:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Project Banner

Congrats on the new WikiProject on behalf of WikiProject Animals. I wasn't even aware it was being considered so has come as a bit of a surprise. I do have quick question however, will you be using the WikiProject Reptiles and Amphibians talk page banner or will you be creating your own for article management? Generally sub-projects that consist of only a few members become a task force instead of a whole new project but good luck anyway. ZooPro 08:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. What do you suggest? I noticed Wikipedia:WikiProject Dinosaurs has it's only banner and is a subproject of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. There is a general desire to stay within WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 08:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! And we're hoping new members will flock in. We have six solid ones as of right now. We talked about it above briefly, but we may eventually want our own template (one reason is because our 'importances' would be slightly different) and own assessment grid. But we would like to be a subproject ('daughter') or AAR if at all possible. I hope we can remain our own project though...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:12, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I would recommend using your own banner, that way you can keep track of all the articles within the scope of your project. If you need a hand creating the banner and the associated categories and pages don't hesitate to ask I would be happy to show you how to do it and answer any questions you have, another option would be to add to the current AAR banner. ZooPro 08:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
If we did that would all articles under AAR have ours attached? And thank you so much for the support! I'm not the html-coder of the group. :-P--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I believe it is possible to modify the banner to incorporate your project link in the banner so turtle articles will link to your project however the same could be achieved using the Turtle cat without a banner, It would mean you have to modify all the tags on the turtle pages so really it may be just worth creating a new banner, I will run a few tests and see what i can do and will let you know asap. ZooPro 09:29, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

That sounds great. I don't have a preference either way, whichever happens to be easier. :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
ZooPro, if we used the current AAR banner and added a turtle options would we be able to make toolserve enquirers like this based on the turtle project? If not that would be a reason to go with a separate project banner. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and created {{WikiProject Turtles}}, still quite a bit left, but it's in working order if someone wants to add tags. A question that arises is whether the AARTalk ones should be left on. I'm thinking yes. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:36, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, absolutely. I think our system for rating the importance of articles should be developed before we start adding the template to talk pages, but if you wanna put a few on I'm okay with that.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, The question came up a while back in regards to multiple project banners. It was the general consensus that sub-project banners should take precedent on the article (except for High profile pages they would be tagged with multiple banners), an example is WikiProject Rodents list their banner on all rodent articles but WikiProject Mammals does not even though rodents are mammals. In that same sense, all WikiProject AAR banners on Turtle articles should be replaced by WikiProject Turtle banners, that mean less work for WikiProject AAR and allows you to create a toolserver page and rate your articles how your project sees fit. ZooPro 03:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! What a pleasure to read your message. If only everyone on Wikipedia was so helpful and explained so well it would be a breeze. I've created a toolserve assessment chart with assessment is working and added a few articles so that it has some contents. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 04:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Think how far along we would be if I was half as smart! I don't have strong feelings about this either way, whichever practice is easier/more commonly used.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Natureserve

Any opinion on this site? Just came across in the CoSWEC doc. http://www.natureserve.org/ TCO (talk) 08:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking at their about us page, they seem reliable. Would be of great help to our sea turtle articles it seems (among others). Nice source (can even put it under "resources" if you want).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 08:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I saw a Canadian report citing it. That said, that report cited Wikipedia, so they have low standards. Although they cited Bell (of bellii fame) which is a pretty decent article. Don't you love how I got that connection to Darwin into the article. Totally legit too. It all connects. But I digress...

"Goals"

The only real remaining section. I feel like the above list is nice, anything else can be added as they get thought up.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 09:00, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I included a little bit, everyone feel free to add/take away.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Some documentation. Various stuff but basically written so newbies can check in and run with it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Archiving

Should we set up archiving for this page. Typically other projects archive slowly, like if the thread is inactive for 60 days or more. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe like 30 days? Anywhere from about there to 60 would be fine by me.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:22, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm a rebel, but. I hate archiving sometimes, especially on low traffic pages. Seems like a lot of the good stuff is in the archive and you lose when it disappears. That said, even I could see the logic of archiving on picta. Probably here, would archive after the initial development, then maybe not. You really don't want new people to have to restart discussions or reinvent them. Even same thing with picta. If it dies down, who cares if there is a year old talk thread. But all the junk from our page work could go into archive no doubt.TCO (talk) 04:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
True, for the next week or so I see this talk page getting rather hairy. Things will slow down for sure but I feel like if a thread hasn't been touched in 30 days it's likely no longer of any real use. Plus archives aren't really lost, on could always search through them (kind of drudgery to do so, but still an option).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Popular pages

I would like to make a request to create WikiProject Turtles popular pages using http://toolserver.org/~alexz/pop/. The current list of projects is here. I believe obtaining a list would be of benefit in establishing and monitoring highly viewed pages. No action is required by anyone - just to agree it's okay to do it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 04:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Seems like most other projects are up there. What does it do (I would be fine with it)?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Submitted request for this. It creates a list of pages in order of the most popular pages. It's useful to see assessment and an overview of page views, but it's really winner for me is you can see recent changes to all turtle pages in one go. Like having a turtle specific watchlist. Sadly not likely to have this page created until March. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh wow. Sounds like a really cool tool! It's a ready made list of articles (in order) that we should be most concerned with.  :-)NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:21, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Assessment

If I add the banner and fill out the quality and importance it automatically adds it to the assessment grid...correct? I read the page where everything is explained, it's just that I added conservation of painted turtles and it's not in there yet (slow to register I suppose).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:01, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Assuming everything is operational it will auto add it to the grid, there is always a lag, sometimes 5 mins sometimes 5 days. ZooPro 05:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh wow, okay. Thank you for the swift reply (2 minutes, about as swift as it gets). :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
My zoo is closed for the day and decided I needed some stress relief on wikipedia hence the swift reply :) ZooPro 05:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Australia Zoo?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Correct. ZooPro 05:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
If you just can't wait then go here and select or type in the box 'Turtle' (no 's') and hit go. In less then 60 seconds it does an update. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:13, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
NYMFan69-86 aren't we going to remove the Amphibians and Reptiles tag when adding the turtle tags? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm fine either way, I think perhaps we should.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Just an update. It seems that all the WP:AAR ones are now done. I can't find any turtles tagged with WP:AAR that are not tagged WikiProject Turtles. I did a lot(hundreds) of stubs today (and found lots of extinct sea turtles) but still think there is another 100 or so species/subspecies type articles to find and another 100 or so of other relevant articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:31, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Very cool! I guess we may have to stumble upon them then if there's no categories on to the article or talk page. :( NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
I seem have done them all now! Not as many missing as expected. The following are listed for completeness but are being left without turtle tags because they are more turtle culture, organisation based or just redirects. Beast of Busco Bixi (tortoise)

Bowser (character) Caribbean Conservation Corporation Cultural depictions of turtles and tortoises Donatello (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) Dragon turtle Dragon turtle (Dungeons & Dragons) Elvis (comic) Esio Trot Fastback (comics) Filburt Turtle Franklin (TV series) Freda (tortoise) Gamera George (tortoise) Halfshell Harvard Bixi Hindustan Sea Turtle Alliance IOSEA Jimmy Olsen Kamemon Kazanlı Lakitu Leonardo (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) List of fictional turtles Macrochelodina Marine Turtles in Africa MoU Michelangelo (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) Mickael Turtle Mock Turtle Pong Pagong Raphael (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) Shelley (tortoise) Snapper (Transformers) Squirtle Super-Turtle Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (film series) Terrific Whatzit The Slowskys The Tortoise and the Hare Tokka and Rahzar Tooter Turtle Tortoise Protection Group Touché Turtle and Dum Dum Venus (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) What the Tortoise Said to Achilles World Turtle Yertle the Turtle and Other Stories Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:02, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Coooooool!!! Great job! Alright, 610 articles, time for me to get to work...NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Taxoboxes

I included an example and a few sentences about them, maybe a better example can be found and some more eyes can look at what I wrote. Thank you.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 05:49, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Emydidae

I put our banner on this article's talk page and assessed it as 'High' importance. Do we think this is the right move (arguably the largest turtle family...members all over the world)?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:06, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Emydidae would be rated high on my suggestion below. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:21, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Importance rating

Here is my suggestion for importance. Hopefully this is an appropriate trade off between significance in the tree of life and page views.

--------Type of article-------- Monthly
views range 		Example Turtle
project
Importance 		Approx number
of articles
Order Any Turtle Top 1
Suborder or superfamily 1000+ Cryptodira Top 3
Suborder or superfamily 0+ Testudinoidea High ~7
Family,subfamily,genus or mix 5000+ Tortoise Top 3
Family,subfamily,genus or mix 1000+ Cheloniidae High 8
Family,subfamily,genus or mix 0+ Staurotypinae Mid ~110
Species, subspecies or hybrids 10000+ Diamondback terrapin Top 7
Species, subspecies or hybrids 1000+ Yellow-bellied slider High ~20
Species, subspecies or hybrids 500+ Arakan forest turtle Mid ~120
Species, subspecies or hybrids 0+ Yunnan box turtle Low ~360
Other turtle articles w/o culture 10000+ None High 0
Other turtle articles w/o culture 1000+ Turtle excluder device Mid ~3
Other turtle articles w/o culture 0+ Turtle racing Low ~10

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I think this is a magnificent way of determining importance.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Great, glad that you like it! I've removed the turtles in culture type per the comment in section below. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Added above chart to assessment page and assessed all orders, suborders, superfamilies, families and a few other that I know with high/top importance. It occurs that some are marginally. The importance is only a guide so if anyone want to rate a article different it's fine with me. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool. I'll try to hit as many others as I can (in the near future). Thank you.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:02, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Project scope

I'm not sure how far into the turtle related articles we wish to go in the scope of the project. If your coming from a herpetology point of view perhaps not far. We do have an assortment of things to consider like Cultural depictions of turtles and tortoises, List of fictional turtles, The Tortoise and the Hare, Turtle farming, Mock Turtle, Turtle soup, World Turtle Day. I don't have any preference but would like to get an agreement on the scope so that a decision can be made on which article to project tag. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 15:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I see it two ways: 1) we are a spin off of the much larger Wikipedia:WikiProject Science, and those pages aren't scientific. On the contrary 2) they are about turtles, and what better project to classify them under than us? I'm on the fence as well...--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:35, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Shall we leave articles not about real exact or extinct turtles off for now but include cross topic subjects about turtles. Later if there is interest or relevance is found the scope could include them. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. It yeah, don't sweat it, we can adapt later on if we choose to.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I advocate including them. Lots of times you'll see a two projects on an article when it's a cross subject. Like sports and biography. for instance turtle trapping would both be a "turtle" topic and a "fishing" topic. Think if I wrote such a subject would want both banners on it. People from a herp background contribute bio knowledge and people with a trapping background contribute the methods. Not asking you to write those articles or worry too much about them at all really. Just would benefit from your banner. Up to you on teenage mutant ninjas though.TCO (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
That's true, it really couldn't hurt.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Glyptemys template

Was {{Glyptemys}} meant to go under 'Families?'--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

No. My mistake. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Species article example idea

The current Wikipedia:WikiProject_Turtles#Guidelines_and_things_to_include could be made into an example article with actual headers/section/taxobox references etc. The wording could be a guide on what content to add, how to format reference and other things learnt and required to get to FA. Both an example and a guide documentation.

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Turtles/Species Example

Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, good idea, I don't know if I'll include everything (formatting references may be a bit much), but I (and all of you as well) could offer insight and suggestions. Will work on.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Well not everything, just fill bits in as you come across them. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I'll get working on it; it would be a great asset to new editors.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

snapping turtle FT questions

I'm thinking of taking snappers to an FT, but had some questions. I thought it was as simple as the family, then alligator and common. Now I see more things going on.

1. Anyone know if the elevation of the S AM and C AM serpentina to full species was recent or what the whole story was there? Was that another Rhodin species elevation or a while ago? And is it generally accepted or not?

2. Regardless of the taxonomy (say we follow Rhodin's classification), does it make more sense to have a GA on common snappers or to completely divide all that info. IOW, how different are the turtles? I guess I can just write one on he genus, right? And then its immaterial if the further divisions are subspecies or species. Does that makes sense, just in terms of information conveyance? Right now all the info for "common" is within serpentina and the new species pages are stubs. (Which I'm not trying to get rid of, just want to see where to develop a GA.)

3. How about the extinct snapping turtles? Do you think they need to come to GA? Would anyone care? Maybe I could group them? I can ask at FT also.

4. Other thoughts? Worthiness? Pitfalls?

TCO (talk) 23:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

1. Fritz(2007) has Macrochelys temminckii, Chelydra rossignonii, Chelydra serpentina, Chelydra acutirostris as separate species. The article on Wikipedia was only recently corrected from the claim of only two snapping turtles. Looking at Fritz I can't see any changes since 1995. So no idea why Wikipedia was incorrect, maybe just old information.
2. Genus articles are hard I think, because basically you have to do the research for all species then summarize what you find with appropriate references for each. Distribution maps could be a bit messy unless you have a source that maps them out. You basically have four times the normal about of mapping to do.
3. I doubt anyone would care much about the extinct, GA would likely be okay - all depends on who does it of course, but more then just extinct names would be required for FA most likely.
4. I'd say information on South American snapping turtle(Chelydra acutirostris) and Central American snapping turtle(Chelydra rossignonii) may not easily be available so try looking for good references on them first. We don't have any images of those species either. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

That helps out a lot thanks. TCO (talk) 00:25, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

If your looking to start a new project and just picking the snapping turtles because they are popular can I encourage you to look at Category:Top-importance turtle articles. The mother article Turtles is the highest of all by a long way, both in it's place in the tree of life and also page views(~110K per month). Something to consider but only if you would enjoy doing it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:44, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
It's a worthy idea. I had been thinking I needed to prove myself on some other ones, but maybe better just to go after the big guy. I bet I could help the cause and make it better. And the high views draws me. Even if I just took it from wherever it is now, I donno 70%, on the goodness scale to 85%, would be a deed worth doing. Always room to go after 95% later when smarter. Doing stuff like snapper or terrapin is kinda fun too, but to be honest those are tailor-made for the armies of AP students that NYM will be bringing in. They could have a lot of fun with them, and I could put my time against something higher. You've got me intrigued. It would be a whale of a task. Comparable to Lion, maybe even more worthy. Hmm...  :) TCO (talk) 00:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
These Chelydra's are more muddled then I first thought. the reptile database gives a different lineup and gives some 2009 references. Note also the comments with 'Shaffer et al', 2008. I recognize that name from somewhere ;) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I think I would probably just sidestep it by doing an article at the genus level. All the info is in that article regardless, not the stubs. It really doesn't matter if we call them a subspecies or a species (if it's not just Shaeffer, like if Fritz and Ernst have gone along), I would probably ust use the new system. Although I would note, for benefit of the reader, that some older or even current sources still use the old system. And then would just talk about the animal itself (so if the classification ever changes again, the info is still valuable regardless).

On the extinct subspecies, my initial thinking would be to keep the info all in the "Family" article:

  • Might be easier than building up all the different stubs (they can live, just thinking where I want to put content). Like I think with picta, it would have been a coordination nightmare to build up a bunch of subspecies articles and arguable made it harder on the reader to run from article to article.
  • Might NEVER get enough info to take the extinct ones to FA on their own (I donno, have to dig into the content and see detail, can always change plans later)
  • Also if the extinct ones are similar to each other may be more useful to compare and contrast in that Family article, also might give me some useful content to put in that Family article (which otherwise would just be a lot of repetition of two subordinate articles, or a pure classification discussion). This gives it a little more meat as an article itself.
  • I think people will not give me too much grief for that kind of decision.TCO (talk) 19:38, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

love the talk page template pic

That turtle is flying. And ready to bite a fish.TCO (talk) 01:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, he's flying man. Effortless. My favorite turtle image and that's why I choose it. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you replace the userbox photo with that one? Might as well be the same image (flying is much more interesting than standing on a white sheet of paper).  ;-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. Whatever one you pick, better to use the same one as your "brand". KISS. Point of having a "logo" is that it is instantly recognizable. TCO (talk) 03:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for doing this. I was thinking the image would not scale well to the small size in the userbox but it looks great. :-) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
No problem. It's funny, I just plopped it in there.  ;-) --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Map turtles

Probably the coolest picture I've seen on commons (flying loggerhead is a close second).

All of these little guys now have our banner on their talk page, have been assessed for quality and importance (hopefully the correct level of the latter), and have had this nifty new navbox placed at the bottom {{Graptemys}} of the article. No action required and I've already patted myself on the back, just sharing.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Attaturtle! P.s. Those are cool species.TCO (talk) 06:53, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, they're beautiful! --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
They look like lizzies. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Lizzies?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 06:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Did same for {{Batagur}}, the terrapins (well, some of them at least).--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Your addition of the Assam roofed turtle is not a member of the Batagur genus, but the Pangshura genus. How about using the names from the family template, they have been checked to Rhodin2010 (with a few exemptions - those not in alphabetic order). Also is it worth putting the genus template which includes the family template up rather then adding them as separate template to each of the articles? i.e add Geoemydidae into Batagur and use only the Batagur template on the Batagur species articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Have amended the two templates {{Graptemys}} and {{Batagur}}, it's just a cut and paste from the family template. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing them, making navboxes is new territory for me. We can probably get away with your one, huge navbox, your right.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps a group GA

Green turtle is an article that's already in pretty good shape (someone brought it up to B-class), but it hasn't been worked on in a while it seems. The page gets a ton of views (we have it as high importance), perhaps we could crank out a quick GA for the project?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The Sea turtle superfamily are popular. I think the order is Sea turtle(35K), Loggerheads(18K), Leatherback(18K), Hawksbill(9K), Green(5K), Kemps(4K), Olive(4K), Flatback(2K) and Cheloniidae family(1k) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:43, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
I think its a stellar choice. I support. I might need to take a break myself as I feel like I'm getting run down and getting a bug. Need to bask a bit to get my internal temperature up after all this picta foraging.TCO (talk) 00:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Yea, chill out and recharge those batteries. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, I'm just going to give it a quick copy edit, fix any outlying format problems, and check all the references. And take your much deserved brake TCO.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Also, this article may have to be moved to Green sea turtle...no?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
The idea is controversial (according to the talk page) so that the {{Requested move}} process will have to be used. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I did see those discussions: they happened years ago! I've left a new comment under one of yours, we'll see if anyone comes along. --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I think if you let them know you are planning to make a major contribution, that may help them change it to what you want. I think it's reasonable that the users puting a lot of content in (and having most knowledge) are a little more influential.TCO (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, ZooPro changed Painted Turtle to Painted turtle for me because I told him I would be doing work on it and there was no controversy over what it should be called. I don't thing Green turtle will be so simple...there's been some discussion on the talk page about it and people seem to be divided.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I know it sounds silly, but I shy away from articles with that crap going on. There are people who will spend hourss and hours debating ndash versus hyphen, but won't build a stub to an FA (in content and prose). It becomes a time suck and demotivating and not even much benefit to readers, if you let yourself fall into the endless debates. (Can be a little fun as well, but then what have you accomplished other than forum bickering). I bet with time, you can drive things, gently, a little more given the benefit of project umbrella and all that. But even then, I would almost rather do a different animal that was not embroiled in naming or capitalizing or classification controversy (and it's fine if their is external controversy...and you just show it...but if it's on wiki battles to slant the article...or god knows argying about tiny format things...it becomes a drag). Sorry, this sounds silly, but it's just a factor to consider, especially if you have a gazillion articles to pick from.TCO (talk) 02:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

There truly are limitless articles we could do. And you're 100% correct about actual naming patterns versus wikipedial naming patterns (the latter being a much tougher pill to swollow...or to even find!). Alas, I could work on the article and sort of ignore all that (although that would make convincing a GA reviewer of it's stability a big challenge), but I don't know, I'll just do minor content/reference/structure work with that article for now. Thank you.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 02:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

looking for an ernst website

I've come across it before. Maybe has same title as his book. Also looking for a bio (did not find one at GMU) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs) 04:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll see If I can turn up anything, a wikipage on him would be great.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
SunC has seen it also I think. Remember him mentioning on one of the pages we frequent. This one is rather hard to find stuff in. TCO (talk) 04:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Got it. [1] Still could use a bio...there must be an old one from GMU. Actually interesting that Barbour is at UVA. Lot of these guys are pretty accessible.TCO (talk) 04:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Emailed Lovich, he forwarded request to Ernst.TCO (talk) 18:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Coooool!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks man. I know I am such a mother hen, but I think it would be so cool if you contacted Taylor and Smith before doing your expedition to Chihuaua. Like a passing of the herp guard. I bet Ernst would be fun as well (and probably more "with it"). the other guys are like 100 years old, so not key info, but ya never know, but just kinda cool to have made the connect. If I get the Ernst contact, will figure out a good excuse to pass that on at least. (Feeling low.)TCO (talk) 19:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. And if I ever actually do the Chihuahua trip, I'm going to assemble the ultimate team of herpetologists! Incidently, what are you asking of Ernst? A bio?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Want to get a stub started on him. He's pretty notable even just for his books, with sales and reviews and all. But I need a source on his birthdate at least. Basic personal details, etc. would help as well. Do you have it on the dustjackets of any of his books?TCO (talk) 19:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Talked to an admin collaborating on Tanner and he agrees Ernst is well notable, no question. But it's kind of pointless to put the page up, if we have zero basic personal info. I know his wife is Evelyn and works(ed) in DC at some science education institute, but that's from a web search, not sure I have it sourced (although they did a book together, might be there). — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs) 19:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I just returned a few of his books to the library. I have two left and neither of them say anything about him (I guess he's humble). I've done some googling as well and turned up virtually nothing. He's certainly notable, but perhaps not accessible.  :-( NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:02, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Bio's

There is a discussion over at WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles about whether to include Biographies of Herpetologists. It would seems the same discussion is appropriate here. As an aside if your looking for existing herpetologists articles try looking in Category:Herpetologists, and drill down in the Category:Herpetologists by nationality section. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

As far as including biographies in this project, I would think it depends on the person. For instance, if an Ernst article gets created than absolutely, but if a herpetologist did the majority of his work with snakes or other reptiles, and wrote one paper on turtles (seems to be the case with S. B. McDowell), than I think maybe not. 'Money' welcome.  ;-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Even Ernst has a big book of snakes.TCO (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Ernst is a herpetologist through and through.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
Unless you are quivering, would just leave it with the AARR then. Even for the herps, I find that sometimes they do stuff with mammals or what have you (they are naturalists), but usually you can see that most of what they do is herp.TCO (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
That may be best. Unless a guy (or gal) is strictly turtles, we may not have to include him or her within the scope of our project. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:35, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I still have someone building out Turtle racing. TY for banner.  :-) TCO (talk) 23:48, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I assessed for higher quality. Certainly not a stub any longer.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Reptiles Tag

Just letting you know I have re-added the Reptiles banner for Geochelone nigra abingdoni, WikiProject Reptiles considers it a high priority article, I only mention it here because it was replaced with a turtle banner, I have left both banners on the page. Cheers ZooPro 07:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand. Are you saying high priority article are to be left in the AAR project but Mid and others are not? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry this will have to be a rushed reply (see my talk page for why). Anything that you would consider to be important for the reptiles project (like high or top importance) should generaly have both banners on it. Cheers ZooPro 13:52, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

To do

Get involved with WikiProject Turtles discussion.


Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Turtles/to do above is now added to the project template. It might be nice expand on to do tasks for newbies. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, cool. And I've been meaning to expand this, but there's just so many! I'll get to it though, little by little.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:34, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Image section

Thought it was confusing as written, given the photo did not have alt (in the photo on this page), and then the example was missing caption. So I made them match. Beefed up the section on labeling. Alt text is kind of a subtlety and we need to push strong captions before getting to alt text. So went ahead and made a little minisection with a few strong tips. Hope going where you want.TCO (talk) 07:28, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, the colors pop. I like it.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 18:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

my mind must be recovering

finding things to help with here!TCO (talk) 07:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Not sure if it is my mind or just needing something new to sink copyeditor fangs into. Took a look at the project. FWIW some comments on how to dress it up:

1. Organize the 2 equal bars headers. We have different parts of "how to write an article (outline, images, resources) scattered around amongst "project stuff like the userbox and such. Let's group things.

I did some of this, let me know what you think (put all article expansion stuff together, member stuff together, etc.)
It's getting there. Go further with it. Add some sort of 2 equals header like "how to build the ultimate turtle article" Add a para that motivates and helps the prospective article writer. Sell! Group all the how to article stuff (probably towards the bottom, but your call) under the two equal header, with three equal headers:
  • outline
  • images
  • resources (maybe rename "how to research" or "research resources"). Resources is too generic a word
  • tools (must be a better title for what we mean here, clerical guides or something, I donno, floating again). Maybe "Writing tools". Also kick "related projects" out of tools and just make it a separate, probably 2 equals section. Probably put it with other project admnistration stuff.TCO (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

2. Let's try to make the language tighter and more tailored. Some of it reads like a generic project and is wordy. Cut fluff, add meat. Make it ours.

3. I think the project is mostly around building species articles, mostly around goals of GA and FA. I think we sort of have that coming out anyhow, by our content even if we don't say so explicitly. So let's go ahead and say something like that. Will make it a bit more interesting than every other project that just wants to have a chunk of wiki and throw talk banners around. Or maybe we still want to do a lot of that. But I think we have SOME desire to push stars and circles. Which is cool...they are a good motivator. So let's say it.

TCO (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Portal:Turtles is open

The Portal:Turtles is open but presently much incomplete. Discussion is underway to find six suitable turtle images. Feel free to make image suggestions or comments there. Images for the portal want to be for free use. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Capitialisation Turtle => turtle etc.

I'm glad to report this is complete for all Top and High importance articles. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Nice!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Most of these are done - all mids. But taking it easy now. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

image brushup

Just sharing in case it helps stuff you guys do. I used the image improvement group and they very quickly improved the image I had for Tanner (Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wilmer W. Tanner, scroll down). Kind of a cool capability. I thought I would be golden since I have a plate photo with 5M, but they still improved it. See the tiger pop more with better contrast. TCO (talk) 03:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

It looks good; I offered my support (explaining up front that my vote may be biased) and offered one comment.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:57, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I hope they don't think I'm working the room. Anyhow, good to learn another couple aspects of the project (FP and Image Restoration). We can't add anything more to the image. All we can do is take away. Well, maybe the plate itslef or the negative or something has more info, but I'm not going to go after that. Good eye and good comment on the elbow. all about learning...TCO (talk) 04:30, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. And I realized as I was writing the comment that it probably couldn't be fixed. Regardless, I support it's FP-ness.  :-)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
No sweat man. Always keep it honest. After I said that, I went and looked and we did do a crop (can see if you look in the non-cleaned file versions) to get rid of a black liner at the bottom, but the elbow was resting already then. Actually the cropper did a pretty careful job not to cut any of his arm. TCO (talk) 04:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, looks like exactly just that black line was cut out. It's a fine image, good luck with getting FP!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Goals

1. What should the Project emphasize?

2. What are some tactical time-based goals?

You mean like a certain number of GAs or FAs by a certain date?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, for example. Or maybe SunCreator wants all the articles labeled and categorized. Or I want to boost the membership. Or whatever. I'm just saying let's brainstorm on goals. Just cool to discuss them. Also, I think some time based goals make us think about reality (and play into my plan to boost membership...hee hee). It's just a goal, so if we don't hit it no big deal. And none of us are getting paid for it. But I just think it can motivate and thinking it through is interesting. It's how I would attack something in work world, or even at an after school club. TCO (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

(I have thoughts here, but would like to ask questions before tossing in my views.)TCO (talk) 09:09, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Have written some ideas in topic further up but here is some current thoughts in no particular order:
  1. Tag all turtle article (75% done?)  Done
  2. Make sure turtle articles are correct taxonomy wise up to date (60% done?)
  3. Ensure all species article have a taxobox and suitable taxobox image - or at least make a reasonable effort to look for some, especially Top/High importance articles.
  4. Ensure the correct use of article titles per WP:CAPS, i.e change Caspian Turtle to Caspian turtle etc (~60% done?)80% done.  Done
  5. Have a suitable logical navigation(or similar) template to all family/genus/species/subspecies article (90% done?)80% done subspecies required somehow.
    1. A not so obvious advantage of this is that people on other language wiki's can use it, so it gains interwiki's also.
  6. Prepare a "how to create a quality turtle article" (not done), this would be a document of things to do and check to get the quality at high as possible, i.e to FA if suitable.
    1. I'm on it!--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
      1. An example from another project Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Waterways/How to write about UK Waterways :) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
        1. Cool, I'll look at it carefully.NYMFan69-86 (talk) 03:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
  7. Establish a list of the most suitable turtle articles(not done) that could be taken by a new student and made towards an FA. i.e check for availability of reliable sources, multiple appropriate images, importance of topic etc. I imagine having like a Top10 of these and presenting them to an AP Biology project or similar.
Just some ideas. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

It's a stellar list. I would maybe add

  1. build number of active participants, probably defined as something more meaningful as number of people signed up (maybe a SunC tool can come into play here) Technically it is sort of a subordinate "how" goal, but it affects getting articles done pretty directly. And having it as a goal, keeps outreach present in our minds.
  2. engage with outside academics (not sure how to quantify this, but I think it's doable, makes us special, etc.)TCO (talk) 19:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

A little treat

Open {{Testudines}} and see it you notice anything. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I may have peaked at the history but, all the stuff at the bottom!? Yey!  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Adding WikiProject to the {{Testudines}} template and having an inviting to-do on {{WikiProject Turtles}} is for TCO's goal #1 above. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I love it. can we get rid of the thing that talks about the meta banner (not see it)? The show stuff is great, but not that thing below talking about how we made a banner.TCO (talk) 02:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand. When it's used on the talk page of an article it appears as this. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

perfectTCO (talk) 17:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Book References

We need to find some more recent books to list on the main page, I mean one is from the 1950's, this is ok, but there are more recent books. Also the list is restricted to US species and wont help with the world of turtles. Faendalimas (talk) 15:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. Something like best "turtles of Eurpoe", "turtles of Asia", etc. books? want to research it and add? I know there are the field guides and if that is all we have can list them, but I find them very thin on content (Although amazing for what they do and great pictures, which we can't use. :-() — Preceding unsigned comment added by TCO (talk • contribs) 17:58, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm all for the inclusion of more global/current book (and internet) sources. A few others and I only put the ones we knew of, a search for more will be done.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Red-eared slider article to GA

Seems like an important and easy article to take to GA. NYM, do we need to form a press gang to make some AP students do the work?TCO (talk) 19:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I think Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2010 is done, my teacher expressed some emotion here. There may still be some hope here, with this user: User:Earthdirt. Is there a userbox that adds the person who has it to a certain catagory like "teachers" or something? That may serve as a black and while (or blue and white) list of teachers on the wiki.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 19:51, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Your teach sounds like a special guy. In general Wiki has an issue of poor technical articles. They are often BOTH incorrect and overly confusing because of terminology. Usually at least the latter. There is a comfort factor in "sounding sciencey" for the insecure. But when you really drop down, you are able to be BOTH scientific and explanatory. You develop the intellectual bravery to charge a tank with a hand grenade at that point. I think your teacher might even be to the left of me on this point, although I am definitley more liberal than teh Wiki. But seriously, this is not just me driving some abstract point. I got ALL my first authored papers in science accepted without revision because I was brutally honest and clear. If I dropped a sample on the floor (but still wanted to report results, and that can happen, not every experiment gets redone, especially if funding ends, but still better to report it), I just SAID IT. Anyhoo. You are still not getting me on the advertising thing. Your teach is a start, but he's one guy in OBX. There's a NATION to be recruited from.  :-) TCO (talk) 20:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
No, I'm with you friend. I'm trying to find out if there's a way of generating a list of wiki users that are teachers. I feel like that may be the only way to do this effectively. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
(ec)O darn. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-12-27/Ambassadors. I'm not suggesting being an ambassador although you can if you want to, rather that somehow could some of the 500 or so students be pointed this way. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

A. I would get some page done that was inviting. Maybe I could nuke something out. Despite my apparent handgrenade versus tank attacks, I have an older-brother didactic bone in my body. You and Jimmy could vet it or help with it or whatever. Or just do it, if I provoke you. Definitely don't want to steal anyone's project.

B. I would go direct, somehow. Teacher's union or The College Board (AP test sellers) or what have you. Yeah, if everyone does it, it will be spam and get lost. But they're not (yet). So eff 'em. Go sell. (and the "sell" can point back to our page on AP projects.)

(that's what I'm thinking. Course I'm all bold and different and all.)  :-)

TCO (talk) 21:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk of different File:Owen and Mzee.jpg, unfortunately it's also not free. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Turtles public watchlist

I've created a public watchlist replacement for the Turtle articles that is available for everyone, even if not logged in. You may like to copy the link to a prominent place on your user page or talk page.

 
 
 
 
Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Reptile Database

We have Reptile Database in the resources. My limited experience of checking it shows it's out of date from a taxonomy point of view. For example with Chelydridae and with Batagur. So not sure what it's purpose is. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

To answer my own question the taxonomy is dated but if you drill down to an individual page it has a good list of sources in the References section. Will mark the WP resource line accordingly. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, a bit out of date (despite being updated only a month ago [but that was about a week and a half before Rhodin]). And thank you.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
A few weeks would be fine, but the Chelydridae info which I checked yesterday appears to be pre-2007 of Fritz. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
You need to understand how and why these databases are updated. The Reptile Database is updated by consensus, partially at a time, by a group of people who have never worked on turtles. Hence they are of low priority, they will always be several years behind for turtles. The Chelonian Research Foundation updates every year in a consensus meeting between the members of the Tortoise and Freshwater Specialist Group of the IUCN. That is by turtle specialists, who have a vested interest in this list being up to date. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 20:08, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool. It's nice to have someone on our side who can give us this sort of advice. You've had good experiences with Chelonian then? NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Well I am a member of the IUCN TFTSG and have published extensively in CRF publications so I guess I am an insider here. You will note I am credited several times (they cite my publications and I was thanked for my comments and help in formulating the document) in the Rhodin article you mention though I am not of course an author of that document. I will recommend here use the Rhodin article as your benchmark, it is the most up to date assessment and more importantly the preferred position of Chelonologists. You cant go wrong then, web sites get out of date as quickly as books if not maintained. Ernst's website is no longer updated niether is Iverson's, even my own is not as up to date as I would like. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 20:56, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Extinct turtles

{{Extinct turtles}}

Have made a navigation template {{extinct turtles}} for extinct turtles. I know very little about extinction in general so maybe missing things. Feel free to edit as required. I've let Wikipedia:WikiProject Extinction know as well. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Cool! Every time I turn around you've made something awesome.  :-) NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:49, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Every article in the above template now has that template on it. As about half were orphans I've remove the orphan template because they all link to each other. I also added the turtles portal link to each page as I noticed they often had links to other portals. It seems sensible for every article to link to a portal - no entirely sure however, as I can't really find much info on when to link to the portal. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:58, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
I notice that Colossochelys atlas (which should be at the genus page) was not included in the navbox.--Kevmin § 01:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Colossochelys has been added. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that Kayentachelys is misplaced in the navbox. The genus is known from the Early Jurassic, but is listed in the Paleogene/Neogene section of the template. --Kevmin § 16:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Corrected that and did a few others also. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:15, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Found Chisternon · Anosteira · Glarichelys · Arabemys and Araripemys and added them. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:55, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Posted to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palaeontology#Extinct_turtles also. Seems an active WikiProject. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:07, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Content goals

It seems that having some content goals would be a useful motivator. I noticed the one criteria for having a featured portal is having around 20 featured or good articles. Currently there are seven within the scope of the project, so twenty would be a big step up but something that could be achieved. Any thoughts? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Twenty, wow. Certainly doable, i could probably do a few GAs in the next few months if I really tried. TCO has his snapping turtles and turtle racing, perhaps the group GA for green sea turtle (which may he the best article to pursue next, it's almost there it seems), and I'll see how many students I can get involved. We may not have a featured portal for quite a while though.  :-( NYMFan69-86 (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Goal: to achieve 20 points of featured content.
  • Started: January 2011 with 3 FA's x2, 3 GA's and 1 FL. (50%)
  • Update: April 2021 with 6 FA's x2, 2 GA and 3 FL's. (85%)
  • Current: July 2021 with 6 FA's x2, 3 GA's and 3 FL's. (90%)
90% completed
Here is a little motivator we can pin up. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool, maybe also display that we should try to get this by like April fools day or something? Maybe a time limit will add to the motivation. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
A date seems good. Which year? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I should know better than to challenge you guys! Love the spirit. Um...may I have a pay raise? ;) TCO (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Sure, we only pay in gold stars and plus signs though. ;-). NYMFan69-86 (talk) 00:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Double your pay today! Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

What kind of turtle articles would be best for an AP class

Any thoughts on this? Like is it easier to do a very rare species or more common? Local or away? Also, what kinds are more interesting? I assume normal species articles are most suitable? Not taxonomy ones or usage.

If we made a list of what I think of as kinda "plum" articles (ones with a lot of human interaction and the like), would those intreest or be accessible to students? And is it reasonable to assume that they would progress them? (Like I would not want to get armies of elementary school students as we end up doing more work, than getting work. But I think AP-undergrad, we get value from, no? Maybe with some support system and occasional looking at (but we wouldn't be able to resist watching page anyhow).

What would you put on a "plum" list? I was thinking:

  • Alligator snapper
  • Common snapper
  • DBT
  • RES
  • GST
  • WPT
  • EBT
  • DT

TCO (talk) 08:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Those articles with lots of in-depth and easy to get hold of reliable sources. A long term established toxonomy helps greatly also, I am thinking here of the problems of family and species where older sources group them in a different way. An American native species helps as sources are generally more available at least in English. As a very rough guide the most popular articles have the most sources, cut that - those without many page views are unlikely to have lots of in-depth sources.
Possible candidates:
Most but not all of the articles in Category:High-importance turtle articles are good candidates. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 13:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

CNAH?

Any thoughts on them?

The Center for North American Herpetology - cnah.org? Never heard of them before, but likely because it's US only. Looking at http://www.cnah.org/nameslist.asp?id=7 I'm unimpressed. The taxonomy is out of date on the Snapping turtles, Box turtles and Sliders. The detail on the species page is a photo and a name. Little content and of little use as a source. Home page is like a links farm. Do I have the right CNAH? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 14:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Yeah. Just wondered if you had come accross them. I got the same impression of the taxonomy and content (wiki has a lot more, better, no doubt). They do have some very nice images. thousands according to them. State of Oklahoma was using several of their images.TCO (talk) 14:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Nice images. Yes, agree. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you see anywhere where they have all "thousands" of images? I came across the OK ones and they say on their site they have all kinds of slides and sell them and the like. But I don't see a display. TCO (talk) 17:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Each page of http://www.cnah.org/nameslist.asp?id=7 has one for example
But no easy way to navigate. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
You may want to try using World Chelonian Trust they have a huge image database, I do know the owner of that site I can negotiate some usage rights maybe if you like. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. We cited their differentiating painted turtles article. Was quite thoughtful and really helpful versus conflicting comments in other sources. Let me figure out what I need. Had this whole plan to keep raising the bar (even have requests in now for video donations) on the picta article. But I might shift elsewhere now.TCO (talk) 20:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

image from Cheldonian trust

OK. So there is a western painted turtle plastron pic I would like.

1. Should I just enquire normally (am used to that) or do you want to do the request Faendalimas or just send an email ahead of me? There is a bunch of specifics about licenses and such (I've lived this, with donations) so a casual "you can use it on wiki" won't cut it with the Commons volunteers.

2. (others) do you know if having the little in-pic attribution will cause issues with the people here? And I would like to crop it somehow, although would be tricky. But any license acceptable to use, allows modificaiton anyhow (and I give attribution on file pages like a text book).TCO (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

image sources (comments requested) NBII and Finding Species

Have seen others use NBII as a source. Warning some images are no commercial (too restricttive) but others are PD. HAve seen people refer to it as a government source, but this seems a bit "off" as justification if a lot of content is restricted. It's not like an agency website, but an on purpose commons (most of the images are not FED GVT property). Thoughts?

Also, they refer to this site, but I could not for the life of me figure how to find any images there: [2]

TCO (talk) 00:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The NBII about page says it's free for nonprofit uses. Wikipedia can only have free for profit and non-profit. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:45, 25 January
It's probably something to watch for with Commons images. One I want to use is actually PD anyhow. But the people put down governement source as the rationale and it's really not a government source. It's just a database of other people's images (and like you say a lot are restricted).TCO (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

anyone use Forestry.com for images?

I signed up on their system. Trying to learn how to use their different things and then not sure what sort of images to take for wiki. They talk about powerpoint settings and large page downloads and the like. They are half CCbySA and half CC_NC. Want to learn how to ask for permission to for some of the stuff that says NC. Also they have a lot of National Park Service images that are NC. Seems wrong, no?

[3]

TCO (talk) 08:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Marginated tortoise

Good find. We should be able to get that thing back to GA at least. Refs look very thin. But lots of awesome images. If we get it to GA, then that helps the "20". If you can find any more former FAs (or even former GAs), let's think about "fixing them". Seems like a worthy service. TCO (talk) 20:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes on all four accounts. Good article, great images, we can bring it up to GA (at least), and citations look incredibly thin. Maybe a group thing after List of U.S. State Reptiles?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 21:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Cool. Think it would be a little easier (not from content, but just from a less important topic) than the sea turtle one. Plus I realized that taking stuff to FA does not help our count (maybe need to tweak the rules. like double credit for an FA over a GA or FL). I reached out slightly to the old author of the article on de-wiki (some turtle book writer and namer of a subspecies). Was pretty low key. He obviously did not do anything to really help the article ove last few years and seems to be more de-active. I just invited him to check out our project.TCO (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
That's good (the outreach, not that he's semi-inactive). We'll see what the says/does in response. Let's hope for the best.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:09, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
It was front page in 2004, I don't think anything had citations back then. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:14, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Haha, maybe not. That's my biggest concern with the article. There's probably even more literature out there now then what's represented in the article (that's almost a definite). It won't be much easier than any other B-class one we have going, we can just tell reviewers and such "hey, it was FA once, so we're going for it again."--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:17, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed. I think FA is a ways away for that thing. Would steer it to GA for the near term.TCO (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Have reassessed the article as C-class, so much unreferenced. The images are nice, but that only goes so far :) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
We can set a different limit for the FA/FL's. There are 4 today, perhaps another 2 or 3? Kinda depends on when the end date is being set, FA's don't get done quickly. It seems that FA's take about ten times more effort then a GA. Perhaps if we have maybe five GA's done then pick the best one to try at FA. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
True. Right now it's all about whether we want to take single articles and go all the way with them (through FAC successfully) or take several articles almost all the way (through GAN successfully). At this stage in the game, the project may be best served if we do the latter: expand articles to GA until we're ready to take individual ones to FA.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

I am just trying to make the SunC ticker advance to the right. And taking a GA to FA does not do that, right? So I only gain by taking lower to GA. Simple as that. If you want FAs out of me, you have to somehow at least give me credit for taking a GA to FA. Otherwise all I do is GAs. Oh...and FLs. TCO (talk) 01:12, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I think emphasizing GAs is more bang for the buck. Think we gain more in prestive from a B rising to GA than from a GA going to FA. TCO (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I agree. GA's are good for now. I have about five or six on my mind that I'd like to do next. Whether my merry band follows me, I don't know. I'll be checking out all the work being done. These next few months are going to be awesome for turtles! --NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:44, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
We can have two tickers. :) One for Featured and one for Featured and Good. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 01:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
How about three, FA's, GA's, and FL's? And we work to have twenty total by April Fool's Day?--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 01:50, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
When I take a GA to FA, the problem is I "lose" a GA. If you somehow made it so that didn't happen that that would be good. Or really just give two points for an FA and one point for a GA or FL. Not trying to make this hard, just yakking.  ;-) TCO (talk) 03:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Okay, but if we give two points for an FA we are making it easier to get to 20 in total. So let me rethink the 20 a bit. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

FA double points

Okay, 2 points for an FA. 1 point for a GA or FL. Goal would be then to get 27 points in total. There are 10 already, so another 17 points are required. Sound good? And the date April fools day. That sounds impossible to me, date wise it's only ~68 days to go - look how long the FA reviews are going on! I think the date ought to be a bit more realistic and set an interim target for April fools day. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Keep it at 20. It's still a stretch goal to get 10 GAs. I like it though. It motivates us to go grow the group. TCO (talk) 04:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
So twenty points with fas counting as 2 points and 1 for gas and fls. I think that would he okay. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes agreed and it's a tough target by April 1. I'll update the ticker tomorrow. Regards, SunCreator (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC).
I can't work out how the ten GA's are required to get to twenty points. If picta is promoted and the FL comes off only 8 GA's are required. Are we talking about 10 promotions? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
It will probably be pretty fluid. If GA's are promoted to FA while this is happening then we'll need less GA's. Overall, we'll try to shoot for 20 still, right? If picta passes we'll have 4 FA's, 2 GA's, and 1 FL: 11 points. We'll need nine GA's-I believe-in over two months. (check my math)--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:23, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Well if US state reptiles goes FL then its 8 GA's. I'm tying to be clear with the goal ticker. So the objective is 20 points? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't count them until they come in. And it's OK to have a couple "wins" early. Will make us feel progress. It's still 10 in two months, even though we have some of them further along than others.TCO (talk) 02:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Goal articles

Have we ideas about which article to go for on the GA? It seems to me that L.tak is looking at box turtle although I maybe a bit presumptuous on that. If we start making some candidates I can check through the taxonomy and highlight if that has complexities. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I know of three I would like done: Glyptemys, Spotted turtle, and Green sea turtle. I'll put some work into these over the next few weeks to months. Faendalimas talked about some on TCO's talk page. I think some user's may go their separate ways with this, everyone has preferences. Another thing to do would be look at the taxonomy of our "top" and "high" importance articles to see if there's any confusion. If not, perhaps a group project to get our most critical articles done.--NYMFan69-86 (talk) 22:13, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Shortlisting

Tops
Ok I am guessing that this is what we want to work on, as stated I am happy to put some effort into the Tortoise page, if you like I can expand the Pleurodira and Cryptodira pages. The differences between them is largely anatomical with some interesting zoogeographic implications. I not they are in a "too hard' basket I guess but the anatomy of Pleurodire's was my specialty as a morphologist. Just note I am waiting for my literature collection to arrive from Australia its en route now, I will be better equipped to deal with this when it arrives, next week or so I hope. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 23:27, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Really pleased that you are involved. What is hard for us to source and understand, is maybe easy for you. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
As well as the ones you noted above(Pleurodira, Cryptodira and Tortoise), you may like to consider Chelidae listed below. That's perhaps an article suitable to you. We are attempting to get good articles status by meeting the Good article criteria. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 23:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Highs part 1

It's a great analysis. I think anything we can get someone jazzed up for, that is feasible is worthwhile. but these are kinda "plums" in terms of there being a lot of info out there and easy for someone to get interested in.

Whatever we can get Faendalimas motivated to do is good. I personally am a little less interested (and think might be hard) in taxonomy articles vice species, but that's probably just what I'm familiar with. Heck, maybe taxonomy article would be easier (if less needs to be written) or it could even be done as an FL. Hmmm...we should look at format of some higher level tax articles that have made FA, GA and FL.

I'm going to see if that fellow can push Turtle racing along. The hard part is good overviews. But it doesn't really divert our resources if we invite him to take a whack at it. And we can advise on some of the formatting type stuff that we know about (he has not done a GA), but he seemed to be moving it along in terms of research.TCO (talk) 02:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

What is 'taxonomy articles vice species'? Genus, families, superfamilies, suborders are more wide ranging then species for taxonomy and so yes they are harder. Cladograms come up. Distrubution maps are not so simple etc. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, invite the turtle racing guy. That can be a GA article. Dger seems interested in the common snapping turtle. All looks good :) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
He's "in". TCO (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I meant higher grouping. I think they're worthwhile articles and some (like box turtle maybe) are nice places to go into content detail. I guess I just sorta feel like I understand the "formula" for a species article, but not what is needed for a higher grouping article. I mean there are some where there is only one species in the genus, but then that's bascially a species article. Looking at some that are GA or FA (even outside of turtles) might be useful. Like I was even wondering if you could (or should) do them as an FL? I guess it depends too. You may have some where the species articles underneath are well done. Or others where they are all stubs. But I'm sure we will figure it out as we work on them. TCO (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I like how we are sort of coming up with some plan as I wasn't sure how we could even try this. If we get some people to help and then concentrate on acheivalbe articles, maybe it's doable. Anyhow, one is done today.  :-) TCO (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

You got that right my friend! I'll be focusing on two species articles and one genus article. Which I will expand by using Pudú as an example. For higher levels of taxa, I'm unsure of good examples. Look to User: Sasata for help in that regard. NYMFan69-86 (talk) 04:10, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Would Myrrha or Tanner count?  :-) TCO (talk) 08:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
No. ;-) Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Highs part 2
Highs part 3 - last part
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Turtles/Archive_1&oldid=1136410256"