More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright.
|(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)|
If you have time and want to, than please create this category: Eriophyes triradiatus. Regards. DenesFeri (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, the accepted name for this species seems to be Stenacis triradiatus, so I created that name instead, with a redirect from the name Eriophyes triradiatus. Uleli (talk) 16:34, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi, Thank you! but according to the enwiki the Eriophyes is the valid name. DenesFeri (talk) 08:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- Please ask a zoologist about the correct and current name. A brief internet sulf indicate that the current status is Stenacis triradiatus, but I can't value these. I am into plants.
Hello Denesferi Dr Enrico de Lillo, Universita degli Studi di Bari, Italia is the group specialist for Fauna Europaea has Stenacis triradiatusas the corrrect placement. Use this name. How are you? Best regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Not Ophidiaster ophidianus?
- Hello, it is definitely not an Ophidiaster ophidianus, and obviously not even a species of the Ophidiasteridae family. Ophidiaster ophidianus has rounded and flexible arms, and neither triangular nor pointed - it shares somehow the same appearance as the Linckia species, with a different color and longer arms. Your specimen looks very much like the "sandstars" of the Paxillosida order, with its distinct flat surface and digging ossicles (it may be an Astropecten, but I don't master this genus enough to be definitive). As it appears to be a souvenir, I think it has been dyed (like on this picture).
Here are my reasons : why did you think it was an Ophidiaster ophidianus ? Regards, FredD (talk) 08:51, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Denes - what is your evidence for File:Phoenix theophrasti - Malta.jpg being Phoenix theophrasti? It looks more like P. canariensis; also, its size means it is likely older than the description of P. theophrasti as a new species (1967). I have moved it to Cat:Unidentified Phoenix for the time being. - MPF (talk) 20:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
|File:Polistes nimpha killing an Apis mellifera-20140819-1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.
Images from Wilhelm Leche
|This media was probably deleted.|
|Thanks for uploading File:Cerceris rybyensis killing an halictid bee-20140819-3.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (firstname.lastname@example.org). This also applies if you are the author yourself.
The file probably has been deleted. If you sent a permission, try to send it again after 14 days. Do not re-upload. When the OTRS-member processes your mail, the file can be undeleted. Additionally you can request undeletion here, providing a link to the File-page on Commons where it was uploaded (
Old uploads, and future uploads
MDann has offered to help with the old files. I will look into the handling of future files. Please note an open issue in the permission of File:Cerceris rybyensis killing an halictid bee-20140819-1.jpg--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)