User talk:Amirani1746

Hello, Amirani1746, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hello or good evening, I recently noticed that I was "banned" from the English Wikipedia because supposedly I use multiple accounts. The problem with that statement is that these are long-forgotten accounts, which means I don't use them anymore. Besides, what's the point of being banned when I haven't done anything illegal according to your rules? I am only adding some more or less minor details on the synapsids, in what is this a problem? Amirani1746 (talk) 15:44, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your previous account was Prehistoricplanes (talk · contribs) which was blocked for being disruptive. You are evading this block. PhilKnight (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

If not, is there anything I can do to regain the freedom of my account on account in the future? Amirani1746 (talk) 17:19, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will need to follow the instructions on your main account talk page. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:34, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hello, I confess to having made certain mistakes on Wikipedia when I was known as PrehistoricPlanes, totally ignoring the rules and being libertine at the time, and that is why I sincerely apologize to the administrators and especially to the users, the latter having sometimes required a lot of time for modifications in order to obtain an article of the highest possible quality. However, I would like to clarify two things: 1) Some users on French Wikipedia, especially those who banned me, gave me a second chance because they noticed that I was contributing a lot of edits and translating pages into English, which is highly recommended, so if this is the case for them, why not there? 2) I'm not necessarily asking for an immediate release, but just "indefinite blocking" retirement, knowing that in addition, in the moment when I live, there is not much to do but wait and Wikipedia is one of my main hobbies, because I contribute a lot to it. I would be sincerely grateful if my requests are accepted, knowing that moreover, since the creation of the new account, I have not done any vandalism or inappropriate thing, I just have a huge passion for paleontology and I want to improve it deeply.. Amirani1746 (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You will need to find, at least for now, a new hobby. You will need to request unblock under your original account. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This is not true. Amirani1746 has been highly combatitve, edit warring on Commmons against multiple users to restore their preferred version of an image that they created under the Prehistoricplanes account containing an image of Richard Nixon, which everyone else agreed was inappropriate. [1], see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Palaeontology#Synapsids_are_not_reptiles for additional context. Nothing has changed regarding their non-collegial behaviour that got them blocked two years ago. Hemiauchenia (talk) 10:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking to FunkMonk: I know that at the moment I don't have the right to modify English Wikipedia for a long time, however, I still have a small problem for the article concerning Euchambersia: In the "classification" section, it is marked that Procynosuchus, is classified among the therocephalians, however, in the “Paleoecology” section, the latter is considered as a cynodont, which is in contradiction with the previous chapter. I therefore fear a possible classification error. Amirani1746 (talk) 10:26, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think Lythronaxargestes, who brought it to GA, is the best to deal with this. FunkMonk (talk) 10:36, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can report this error to him then. Amirani1746 (talk) 10:45, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That should be done with the above ping. FunkMonk (talk) 10:51, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

that is to say ? Amirani1746 (talk) 10:53, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Like you pinged me so I could see this, Lythronax can see this due to my ping. FunkMonk (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok i got it, i will send this message to Lythronaxargestes is te next chapter. Amirani1746 (talk) 11:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking to Lythronaxargestes: I know that at the moment I don't have the right to modify English Wikipedia for a long time, however, I still have a small problem for the article concerning Euchambersia: In the “classification” section, it is marked that Procynosuchus, is classified among the therocephalians, however, in the “Paleoecology” section, the latter is considered as a cynodont, which is in contradiction with the previous chapter. I therefore fear a possible classification error.Amirani1746 (talk) 11:50, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's a mistake. If you access the Huttenlocker & Sidor paper, you'll see that these big labels are covering up the cladogram in various places. I must have misplaced Procynosuchus when trying to reproduce it. Fixed. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 13:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FunkMonk or Lythronaxargestes, with the recent discovery of the new species of the mythical therocephalian Euchambersia, I wondered if it was possible to put the image of the skull of the new species to life in the article describing it (link here : [2]). Since you have done the same thing on Wikipedia on some article such as on Viatkogorgon, it is possible that it is feasible.Amirani1746 (talk) 19:10, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this meatpuppeting? Patachonica (talk) 19:19, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant policy would be WP:PROXYING.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:21, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically yes, but I'm not asking for my release... Amirani1746 (talk) 19:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

It has now been six months since I followed the instructions to not edit Wikipedia articles in English (instructions given to me by an administrator on a Wikipedia-linked site whose name I forget). Given that even on Wikipedia in French, I am recognized as being a "sockpuppet" of PrehistoricPlanes (an old account for which I have lost the password), and that I have already participated in the writing of several labeled articles on this language, I think there is a chance that I can contribute to English Wikipedia in a better way than before. I even have several articles in French that I have written which I can translate into English.Amirani1746 (talk) 16:19, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You last edited in February. Six months from February is August. It is currently July. Yamla (talk) 19:41, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

So, after realizing that I had asked for my release 1 month in advance without realizing that I had counted the calendar correctly, I now think that the proposal is now possible. As I previously stated in my last request (see previous section), I absolutely respected all the instructions that were asked of me by the administrators in order to return to Wikipedia in English. Having also lost my password for my previous account (i. e. PrehistoricPlanes), there is therefore only this one with which I can make my contribution. Amirani1746 (talk) 09:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Appeal superseded by later request below. Cabayi (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

is closed. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hello everyone, I want to clarify that I was banned for posting a picture, which some members of the Paleontology Project believed would not to be appropriate for the Synapsida article (Something that I still don't understand, because we We have already found images of politicians on various pages concerning animals, in particular on the article of the class Mammalia). I no longer have access to my previous accounts (I list the reasons in my requests above on my talk page), so I'm using that account for unlocking. If I manage to be unblocked, I will be more cooperative and I will make my contributions to Wikipedia in English, such as the translation of many articles that I have created and/or modified on Wikipedia in French. Cordially, Amirani1746 (talk) 18:07, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You weren't blocked indefinitely for adding an image. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

• Hello Dunkleosteus77, in your article concerning the clade Gorgonopsia, in section Thermoregulation, what is exaclty the meaning of The evolution of a secondary palate, and the separation of the mouth from the nasal cavity, may have increased ventilation efficiency associated with high levels of aerobic activity; gorgonopsians did not have a bony secondary palate, but possibly had one of soft tissue, but even then, it is also possible it was mainly for eating behaviour instead, because i not correctly understand~, di you a more simplier explanation ? Amirani1746 (talk) 20:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amirani1746, you have access to your user talk page while you are blocked in order to appeal your block. If you use it for other purposes you are likely to have that access withdrawn. Cabayi (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi, I know but here i'm only asking a question, not an request for modification. Amirani1746 (talk) 17:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The question has nothing to do with your block. Cabayi (talk) 17:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Amirani1746 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I recognize to be the same user as PrehistoricPlanes, and I apologize for my previous modifications which can be considered as vandalism. For more than a year, on Wikipedia in French, I am recognized as, but I was given a chance because I made sure to contribute to the encyclopedia of this language. I have participated in the expansion of many articles on this section of the encyclopedia, and I sincerely hope to do so here. I want to clarify that I can't come back with my old account, because I simply lost access to it. Cordially, Amirani1746 (talk) 13:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

I am willing to unblock subject to your keeping to the undertaking you have made below. I hope that from now on you will be able to edit without recurrence of problems similar to those which led to the blocks. JBW (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser data shows no evidence of block evasion. I'm not reviewing this unblock request as I have previously declined another request. --Yamla (talk) 13:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well there's one opinion I'd like here.

@Prométhée: Vous avez bloqué Prehistoricplanes à frwiki. J'ai deux questions: Est-ce qu'Amirani a été honête concernant sa compte passée de Prehistoricplanes ? Et est-ce qu'Amirani est un Wikipédien constructif avec cette compte ?

(Prométhée: You blocked Prehistoricplanes on frwiki. I have two questions. Has Amirani been honest about their past account as Prehistoricplanes? And is Amirani a constructive Wikipedian with this account?)

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 20:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amirani1746, perhaps you can answer the following two questions.

1. What do you now understand to have been the reasons for your being blocked? (You have previously said things which made it clear that you didn't understand what the problems were, and I would like to be totally sure that you now do understand.)
2. What other accounts have you used? You mentioned only one above, but there have been others. JBW (talk) 20:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW The other account I used (and also lost) is called JaimesLesMandarines. My reasons for blockages was on the fact that did not show cooperation with other users (I wouldn't hesitate to move the classification of taxons) and that I did by error of the photo montages which turned out to be inappropriate. Amirani1746 (talk) 21:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So LoiDavid2307171 wasn't you? JBW (talk) 16:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW This account belongs to an acquaintance who voluntarily left Wikipedia after it was blocked before I came to deal with the same subjects as him (Paleontology, aeronautics, movies etc...). Amirani1746 (talk) 16:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that seems reasonably plausible, and it was also so long ago that I can't attach much importance to it. Jo-Jo Eumerus, you placed the block. Do you have any opinion on whether unblocking to give another chance would be reasonable? Tamzin, you may wish to wait for something more definite from Prométhée, but I'm pinging you so you can make a response to this comment if you wish to. JBW (talk) 19:28, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak French so can't comment on any frWikipedia input. The sockpuppetry apparently isn't in question here, so the only thing I'd ask is whether the quality-of-edits issues noted at User talk:Prehistoricplanes are resolved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jo-Jo Eumerus you can still use Google Translate for the input. Amirani1746 (talk) 12:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they have the same question as I. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: I just asked my colleagues if they think we should do something about this user on our side. I'll keep you informed. Prométhée (talk) 19:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: The user has only been blocked once but not permanently banned. His last account does not create any problems on the French Wikipedia : he can continue to edit. Prométhée (talk) 17:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Amirani1746, when I wrote above "OK, that seems reasonably plausible" I had forgotten that you actually said in this edit that you are LoiDavid2307171. Why did you say then that you are, and now say that you aren't? JBW (talk) 15:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW I don't think it was me who wrote this, because I don't really deal with the subject of the Creodonta group (the group who traditionnaly include the genus Simbakubwa who the message talks). Until a few years ago, we act as a duo on the platform on the same account, and it is possible that my colleague marked this using in one of my previous accounts. However, as I explained earlier, he voluntarily left Wikipedia afterwards out of weariness. Amirani1746 (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting more and more uncomfortable about the number of times you say something which appears to contradict something else you have said, and then come up with an explanation which you didn't happen to mention until directly asked about it. Above, referring to LoiDavid2307171, you wrote "This account belongs to an acquaintance who voluntarily left Wikipedia after it was blocked before I came to deal with the same subjects as him." Now you tell us that he was editing at the same time as you, even using the same account. Also, that account was never blocked. It would be much easier to have faith in other things you say if you appeared to be giving a straightforward explanation of the matter of these various accounts. Can you clarify the exact relationship among the various accounts, and the people who have used them, and perhaps straighten out some of the seemingly problematic aspects of what you have said? Also, has anyone other than you ever used this account, "Amirani1746"? JBW (talk) 22:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW I can't describe everything, because I can't analyze in detail elements that happened more than three years ago. Basically, my colleague and I used the same account, mainly on Wikipedia in French, on subjects in which we had several interests in common. However, it turned out, especially in view of certain modifications that I saw in the history of the contributions, that he was doing vandalism that was both ridiculous and even downright provocative. Since then, his account has been banned from Wikipedia on this language, but as I wanted to continue his good work which he abandoned, I therefore created an additional account. For several months, I participated in the rectification of several articles before getting myself banned for non-collaborative behavior, even if I changed my IP address regularly in order to discreetly continue to adjust certain things. As my friend knew what the password for my account was, he didn't hesitate to return there from time to time for what I was doing, but since my move to France, I have lost all contact with him, which makes me the main and final owner of this new account. This is also why I lost access to my previous accounts. Amirani1746 (talk) 22:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW, It's been a while, shall we continue the discussion? Amirani1746 (talk) 10:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I still feel a little uncomfortable about some of your answers, but I do accept that, as you say, much of it refers to things which happened a matter of years ago, and you can't be expected to remember everything perfectly. Also, Yamla's check, which found no evidence of recent block-evasion, is in your favour. (Thanks, Yamla.) All things considered, I can't see any obvious reason not to give you another chance, but I would like at least one other opinion. Maybe one or both of Jo-Jo Eumerus, who placed the block, and Tamzin, who commented above in connection with this unblock request, would like to express an opinion. JBW (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, JBW. I'm satisfied, based on what Prométhée has said (merci bien !) that there is enough progress on frwiki to justify a tentative unblock here—even if Amirani's unblock there is apparently their version of what I think of as the "adverse possession unblock" (block evasion forgiven due to relative transparency and overall improvement; here, see e.g. Hatto & Jfgoofy). I'm particularly swayed by the words of Keranplein (mention de courtoisie), translated below (original here):

Amirani1746 has made great progress since they went by Prehistoricplanes, as they now have learned to take to heart the advice of their colleagues, even if there do continue some editorial quarrels, but that's usual on WP and the discussion normally allows for resolution.

Amirani1746 has worked heavily on fr:Portail:Paléontologie on translating the best enWP articles about vertebrate paleontology to French, and it would be a great loss for WP if they had to cease editing. In 2022 they were one of two main contributors to the portal and will likely be again in 2023.

At this stage there remain two concerns, but they aren't admin matters:

• recurring language and style errors, which are resolved by their translations being checked by a third party
• articles that are too difficult for 90% of readers, but one must admit that this is also true in the English version

The balance of their contributions on WP is in my view largely positive, and thus tends toward granting amnesty for their past and permitting them to start anew, as they already have since 2021.

I think that enwiki's scope of an admin matter may be a bit broader than frwiki's, as we consider recurring style issues to be within admin jurisdiction, but only if coupled with failure to heed critique. So I support an unblock with

1. A one-account/no-logged-out-editing restriction.
2. A reminder to listen closely to any concerns about article quality, and to seek counsel—at the Teahouse, the Help Desk, appropriate WikiProjects, or the talkpages of experienced editors—regarding any article quality issues

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 16:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I must say, For several months, I participated in the rectification of several articles before getting myself banned for non-collaborative behavior, even if I changed my IP address regularly in order to discreetly continue to adjust certain things. does sound kind of scary. Definitively agree on the one-account/no-logged-out-editing thing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I too found "even if I changed my IP address regularly in order to discreetly continue to adjust certain things" disturbing. "Discreetly" is, of course, being used here as a euphemism for "dishonestly". However, following those comments from Tamzin and Jo-Jo Eumerus, I am willing to unblock subject to Tamzin's two conditions, together with:

3. No acting in ways which are likely to hide or obscure the nature of what you are doing, or mislead other editors.

If you post here indicating unequivocally that you agree to those three conditions and ping me I will be willing to lift the block. JBW (talk) 19:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW, technically, it is possible that I accept the conditions presented, since they are relatively, if there is the slightest problem with my editions, we can talk in the discussion page. Amirani1746 (talk) 18:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely don't know what you mean by "technically, it is possible that I accept the conditions presented". If you mean that you agree to the conditions then say so. If you don't mean that, then don't. JBW (talk) 20:18, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW, I accept the terms, yes. Amirani1746 (talk) 20:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

JBW thanks, i will start translate who are more developed in French than English Amirani1746 (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Dan arndt was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Megawhaitsia. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Megawhaitsia and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 12:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Amirani1746! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 12:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Inostrancevia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Creek and Canine.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Megawhaitsia 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Megawhaitsia you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Megawhaitsia and Talk:Megawhaitsia/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:22, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Taniwhasaurus, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Canterbury Museum and Parietal foramen.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Megawhaitsia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Megawhaitsia for comments about the article, and Talk:Megawhaitsia/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:41, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Eremiasaurus 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 14:02, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Eremiasaurus you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Eremiasaurus and Talk:Eremiasaurus/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 02:22, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Eremiasaurus you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Eremiasaurus for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Fritzmann2002 -- Fritzmann2002 (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kaikaifilu 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Etriusus -- Etriusus (talk) 04:21, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Kaikaifilu you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kaikaifilu for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Etriusus -- Etriusus (talk) 05:42, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:56, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Aristonectes 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:41, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Aristonectes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Aristonectes for comments about the article, and Talk:Aristonectes/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pliosaurus andrewsi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

— Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 21:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article "Pliosaurus" andrewsi 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Grungaloo -- Grungaloo (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article "Pliosaurus" andrewsi you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:"Pliosaurus" andrewsi for comments about the article, and Talk:"Pliosaurus" andrewsi/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Grungaloo -- Grungaloo (talk) 03:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thalattoarchon 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thalattoarchon you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thalattoarchon and Talk:Thalattoarchon/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 19:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thalattoarchon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thalattoarchon for comments about the article, and Talk:Thalattoarchon/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Esculenta -- Esculenta (talk) 17:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monster of Aramberri, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Desert Museum and Type locality.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:57, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Monster of Aramberri, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Desert Museum and Type locality.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Monster of Aramberri 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Wolverine XI -- Wolverine XI (talk) 12:25, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw that you added content from my sandbox onto the Tylosaurus article without asking beforehand. Just want to let you know that is really disrespectful and is something that I recommend not be done again in the future, whether it be from my sandboxes or anyone else's. People keep their drafts within their sandboxes because they're not ready or comfortable with posting on the main article. Posting it anyways for the whole world to see without asking is a blatant disregard for the drafter, no matter how fitting the content may be.

I know that you meant well, but it's important to remember that good editing requires mindfulness about your peers.

Best, Macrophyseter | talk 00:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Macrophyseter Sorry If i did it wrong, i will not restart again. The summary was so empty that I have to expand it so... Amirani1746 (talk) 11:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Monster of Aramberri you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Monster of Aramberri and Talk:Monster of Aramberri/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 23:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Monster of Aramberri you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Monster of Aramberri for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]