Hi, there's "<ref name="eLS2012">Sætre, Glenn-Peter. (2012). Reinforcement. ''eLS''.</ref>[clarification needed]" in the article. Maybe you're the person to fix it? Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:02, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Reinforcement (speciation) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 10:52, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi there. I noticed that you made the map on the worldwide distribution of marsupials. For North America, your map uses the range of the Virginia Opossum from this map. However, the latter map is definitely incorrect. Opossums can absolutely be found in Wisconsin--in fact, I saw one as roadkill this morning. They and I have been residents of Wisconsin for multiple decades. Perhaps a better distribution range map could be found here. I was hoping that you might use your particular set of skills to rectify the map situation for both the Virginia Opossum and Marsupials. Thanks. BirdValiant (talk) 18:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated
<font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.
You are encouraged to change
[[User: Azcolvin429|''<font color="Green">Andrew Z. Colvin</font>'']] o [[User talk:Azcolvin429|''<font color="Green">Talk</font>'']]: Andrew Z. Colvin o Talk
[[User: Azcolvin429|<i style="color: Green">Andrew Z. Colvin</i>]] o [[User talk:Azcolvin429|<i style="color: Green">Talk</i>]]: Andrew Z. Colvin o Talk
|The Science Barnstar|
|I just reviewed the article you started on the History of speciation. I'm incredibly impressed with how thorough and well-cited the article is. And yet you claim to have "rushed to get this article out as soon as possible".|
|On 12 February 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article History of speciation, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the history of speciation largely began with Charles Darwin's publication of On the Origin of Species? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/History of speciation. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.|
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Reinforcement (speciation) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:21, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
The article Reinforcement (speciation) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Reinforcement (speciation) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:21, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Glossary of speciation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Extant (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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.)
Thanks for creating Laboratory experiments of speciation, Azcolvin429!
Wikipedia editor Cwmhiraeth just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
To reply, leave a comment on Cwmhiraeth's talk page.
Learn more about page curation.
Good morning. While studying your beautiful image of the Sun's neighbourhood I noticed the label Formalhaut, which as far as I can tell is a misspelling of Fomalhaut. I'd have noticed it sooner, but I actually thought that was the name at first! Waltham, The Duke of 08:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello Azcolvin429, thank you for all your contributions. Given your interest in editing bird articles, you may be interested in WP:BIRD which contains many resources to help you. The associated talk page is fairly active and would welcome your input. 'Cheers, Loopy30 (talk) 02:01, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Thank you for phab:T195275. Tangentially related to this, a quick question: Did you see the link asking you to report the error in English, or was it in another language? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 11:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
If it is worth mentioning, User:Johan (WMF), the error no longer appears but the image does not load in the page view. The thumbnails load and the full size loads, but the image in the page view just has a transparent background with the text of the file name overlaid. Not sure why. Andrew Z. Colvin o Talk 02:15, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Your star chart is tremendous. I first found it here: http://theconversation.com/is-alpha-centauri-the-right-place-to-search-for-life-elsewhere-57716 I'm an editor and would like to include a modified version in a book that I am working on. Would you be willing to add stars that I request to your chart? And allow me to reproduce it or a version of it? If so, I'd like to get in touch via email to arrange details. Best, Meliva Koch -- Preceding unsigned comment added by MelivaKoch (talk o contribs) 00:30, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Media bias against Bernie Sanders is suitable for inclusion in popflock.com resource according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at popflock.com Resource: Articles for deletion/Media bias against Bernie Sanders until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. -- Chevvin 20:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much for having created them, fantastic illustrative work ! I am thinking of producing a physical version (puzzle or diverse 3d objects) of the power of then with them for a classroom. Did you use a particular software ? Beaucouplusneutre (talk) 17:35, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Media coverage of Bernie Sanders is suitable for inclusion in popflock.com resource according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at popflock.com Resource: Articles for deletion/Media coverage of Bernie Sanders until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. WMSR (talk) 21:21, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Allochronic speciation at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
With the creation of Criticism of credit scoring systems in the United States (split of content that had been recently added to Credit score in the United States), is there any particular reason that the article wasn't restored to its state prior to the recently-added content?
The structure we are left with in themakes any existing problems worse. Specifically, in the old version, "FICO credit scores" are directly under "credit scoring models", as are VantageScore and other credit scores, while in the new version, FICO scores are the only category of credit scores under "credit scoring models", while other credit scoring models are relegated to a separate "other credit scores" section. Also, in the pre-existing article, these different categories of credit scores were loosely ranked from greater relevance to lesser relevance (e.g. FICO, the most well-known scoring family, is listed first, followed by VantageScore the next most well-known scoring family).
There may be some sections in the pre-existing article that are more suitable for the Criticism article, but I think it's fine to do that over time. I'm just mostly focused on retaining the pre-existing structure of the original article except to the extent that there's a good reason to be changing it. Fabrickator (talk) 05:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)