Is it worth replacing the "in flight" image with your ChoughSilhouette.svg? I can't decide whether a good drawing is better than a relatively poor image of a real bird?

For some reason, the calls site wouldn't let me register, so can't download anyway. I'm still confused by the licence, not sure whether to risk it at this stage of an FAC. What do you think? Jimfbleak (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I downloaded the chough call file - it is in FLAC format and I have been looking at converting it to ogg. From what I understand of the license - it provides all the freedoms required to relicense under cc-by-sa-3.0, I will try and re-upload with credit to the author as given on the licensing page. But maybe we should reconfirm on the village pump. Regarding the sketch, I leave it to your discretion. I often tend to prefer simple illustrations to photographs due to higher "data-ink ratio" (see Edward Tufte for that idea). Will look over again tomorrow. Shyamal (talk) 16:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal Andaman Crow (Euploea) not on your List of Indian butterflies RobertNotafly (talk) 19:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Just added it. Shyamal (talk) 01:51, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shyamal, have just noticed an error on [[1]] I'm fairly certain that the images are of Grey Shrike-thrush (Colluricincla harmonica) but I'm not sure of the protocol to replace them with correct images.Aviceda talk 09:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Shyamal - that was quick! Cheers. Maias (talk) 04:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, I've voted - not a difficult decision Jimfbleak (talk) 06:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing it out! MeegsC | Talk 08:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Going back to your flight images, this would be most useful combined with a similar pic for Alpine, showing the differing silhouettes. However, that obviously makes much more work for you, so absolutely don't do it unless you feel the urge. Jimfbleak (talk) 09:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, do you know of any good silhouettes of the Alpine? Shyamal (talk) 10:19, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alpine looks spot-on to me. If anything, Red-billed looks a little long- (or narrow-?) winged. Flight silhouettes vary quite a bit from book to book, and in at least one Red-billed looks almost identical in shape to Common Buzzard. Thanks for the impressively rapid response. Birds on ground look good too, although I don't think I've seen Alpine other than in flight. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC

Looks really good, I'm sure you are right, my sources obviously tend to show nominate or mainland European ssp. Boca del Infierno brought back memories, we went to Spain for four days about 10 years ago - whale watching from the ferry, two days in Aragon including that Wallcreeper, and two day in Rioja, testing the wonderful local wines after the day's birding. Thanks again - will you put the image in, after all, you've done all the work?. A straight swap for the upper flight picture I assume is the best location?

:) Added the img. The caption seems to be a bit longish. Feel free to edit it. Shyamal (talk) 01:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, I've trimmed the "obvious" bits from the caption (they are mentioned in the text anyway) so that in my browser at least it doesn't overrun the section, thanks Jimfbleak (talk) 06:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special thanks for helping to get this through - your image clearly tipped the balance, FA within hours of its addition! Jimfbleak (talk) 06:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt very much if that was the cause. It was comprehensive and sufficiently well written to deserve it. Shyamal (talk) 07:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Shyamal Many thanks for cleaning the images.More soon I hope but today I have acccess to real butterflies at last.No e-mail here and I don't know about the studio yet but I should get a few pics.Lycaenidae perhaps.Best wishes Robert

Thank you for the pictures ! Shyamal (talk) 11:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shyamal, sorry, I didn't get what you meant by "in Roman". Did you mean that the Tamil Wiki article should have its title in Roman? Or did you mean the title should be its common name and not the scientific name? By the way, form from this page, it appears that the Multibanded Krait is "kattu viriyan" in Tamil, do you have any idea? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 03:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sundar, by Roman, I mean the "English script" as used here. See this from Common name

A binomial is a formal name, and it is the same the world over, independent of the language in use: a binomial is rendered italicised in Roman script, for example, Patella vulgata.

It is a convention and is followed for instance here ru:Беркут. You will have a lot of trouble with Tamil interwiki and I think you need to get the input of experts on the topic of interlanguage biological name usage. Regarding Katti Viriyan, it is quite a generic name - often even ascribed to the Kukri snakes. It is usually however mainly restricted to Bungarus caeruleus which is commonly seen in Tamil Nadu unlike the Banded Krait. Shyamal (talk) 03:41, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it didn't strike me that you meant the Roman script. Yeah, we do almost always give it in Roman script italicised (it's even recommended in Tamil Wiki style guide), but rendering it in Tamil script alongside. Do you think that violates the convention? If so, let me suggest it to fellow Tamil Wikipedians. But, what will readers who don't know the Roman script do? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the taxobox on [2]. That looks fine and I suppose that is because it has a good Tamil common name. Somehow the transliteration of scientific names to Tamil looks a bit contrived. It can also be tricky to pronounce some of these names. But I am unable to think of any better options. Shyamal (talk) 08:27, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does look contrived, because we (per local policy) make it conform to Tamil phonetic rules whenever written in Tamil script. For those who wish to know the original pronunciation, audio, IAST, and/or another notation being discussed locally shall be provided. But, we're not there yet. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 08:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We're pretty liberal about redirects. Will suggest that. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, did you add the svg with veins on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock-Needham_system ? Then please note that RS should be placed one vein more anteriorly and that were it says RS now it should be M. Muscapaul (talk) 03:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. Yes, will do, but give me 24 hrs. Shyamal (talk) 03:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NP

Muscapaul (talk) 03:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shyamal. You seem to have unprotected the birds template, so I'm guessing you could do the same for this one? It's annoying; there's no history of vandalism yet they fully protect it... Richard001 (talk) 07:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, lowered it to semi-protect, it certainly can be annoying. Shyamal (talk) 07:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal What do we know of H.C. Tytler, author of Tytler, H. C. 1926. Notes on some New interesting Butterflies from India and Burma. Journal Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc. 31(30): 579-590.I can't find a thing Robert Notafly (talk) 07:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. I can get ODNB at the public library.Just as well since our library isn't sorted out yet. This pm I have been promised studio lights so I can replace the muddy photos I took yesterday, taking the view that a poor picture is better than none at all.We'll see how it goes. Have a good weekend Robert Notafly (talk) 09:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only really familiar with our practices in the Dinosaur project, but basically we had decided on a general classification system to follow from one or two published sources that were recognized as representing current prevailing usage for most names, and update as any changes become widely accepted. Dinosauria, for example, has had various definitions that ultimately all describe the same clade, so the differences don't really matter. A more complicated situation would be Titanosauria, which has several names used to describe the same clade(s) with various uses of the ranked taxa. Here we're using the most inclusive sense and describing classification differences in the text, I think. If Uniramia is currently in an unused limbo by most or all researchers, removing the taxobox is the way to go, as in "obsolete" taxa like Pisces (which you mentioned) or Thecodontia. The difference is that as far as I know those taxa had never been defined as clades before they fell out of favor. If Uniramia has, I don't know what the justification would be for abandoning the name. I'd say the best bet in this case would be to list it as unranked and discuss in the text. But YMMV. Dinoguy2 (talk) 23:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal I think the Seitz pic of Common Onyx is the nominate and the collection pic the Malayan subsp.But I may be wrong. I will check in the collection on Tuesday.Got 20 or so pics of set butterflies on Friday but these are'nt downloaded from the camera yet.Off to walk my dog now.Hopefully back this pm with more from Seitz Chhers for now Robert

He was a Bengali and Bengalis do not pronounce Prashantha, rather do it without the h: Prashanta. But CRRao was a South Indian, and a South Indian would spell it as Prasantha. I think your move of the page was not correct even though you cited the spelling used by CRRao. I would suggest moving it back to the old spelling. GDibyendu (talk) 10:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that these variations occur, but believe that a valid reference outweighs such conventions. As I know it the Royal Society Biographies are quite careful on such matters making sure that spellings match with certificates and publications and would prefer that it is given its due. If however there is a reliable citation for the modified spelling that suggests that the eminent biographer was incorrect I think a move should be made. Thanks. Shyamal (talk) 10:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal Note comment "Pratapa icetas Underside left. On the right is an image of the upperside of the very similar longinus" under the taxobox pic of this butterfly.Robert

Gonna be mighty useful with vandal fighting! Need to familiarize myself first though....Thanks again!Prashanthns (talk) 06:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]