User talk:Evolution and evolvability

I recently received a "thank you" notice from you for 998115350. This led me to look into you and eventually I stumbled upon and was inspired by your interview with {{U|Ainali}}. Perhaps I should become more involved with {{sc2|WJ}}. —Uzume (talk) 22:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Uzume}} You're definitely welcome to! There are a range of ways to get involved either sporadically or ongoing: from formatting & copyediting (many new articles created are by first-time wikimedians, so references often inserted as plaintext; example) through to submitting an article (created from scratch, or submitted from wikipedia; WP:JAN) through to joining the user group as an ongoing associate/board editor (example). Happy to give more info if you're interested. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:53, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

::{{re|Evolution and evolvability}} as a long time Wikimedia editor, I am interested. I also have some concerns.

::I have a background in Informatics, Computer and Systems sciences and engineering (applied sciences) so these might play into Wiki.J.Sci. and Wiki.J.Pre. I might start off in WP:JAN as that is not so far from editing Wikipedia content but I can also see myself perhaps becoming an editor and/or making submissions (but obviously not on the same submitted materials as that would be a conflict of interest). Making "review" submissions with heavy Wikipedia content is interesting but I think eventually "original research" submissions would prove more interesting to me. I also like bibliographic information sciences content and have been working on Wikidata and SDC.

::I read somewhere that submitters and editors might have to divulge legal names and I would likely want my legal name credited with published works authored or edited by me anyway, however, I would prefer to not have my legal name associated with this account (providing some anonymity). I would not mind making another "public" account for such but that probably runs awry with sockpuppety unless I publicly link them and that defeats the purpose of making such to begin with. Can submissions be made without an WP:SUL? How would that work? I envision emailing content to a submission email address or similar. Can someone be an editor without an WP:SUL? I imagine there is no issue with using this account for WP:JAN duties (do copy editors get credited?). —Uzume (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

:::{{re|Uzume}} At the moment, we've done almost zero advertising, so probably 50% of submissions come from people with an existing interest from the wikipedia side of things. I suspect that as the journals mature, original research articles will make up an increasing proportion as a fee-free OA publishing option. As well as the mixture of reviews and original research. Really good questions on the universal login question. We've had people send submissions in by email previously, so could easily receive a wikimarkup file (previously ppl have sent in latex and docx files, which we've later had to ask them to convert or convert for them). Conceivably, it's possible that a user could create a valid second account (WP:VALIDALT) and notify a checkuser (WP:ALTACCN) if they were to use that account only for the purpose of submission and editing of the article under their real name and keep it fully separate from any activities associated with their existing main pseudonymous account. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 05:15, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

::::0597235851 makiy

::::@@ 2A02:CB80:40B1:1F5E:1808:AFF:FE9D:CC40 (talk) 05:11, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

::::Italic 2A02:CB80:40B1:1F5E:1808:AFF:FE9D:CC40 (talk) 05:12, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi E&e: I see that you've regularly modified the {{Template:Academic peer reviewed}} template. Can you take a look and see if you can fix the error it's now throwing up? It shows on the documentation page too. Thanks! MeegsC (talk) 18:54, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

File:Junior Contributor Reply Tool and full page edit completion rate.png

The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.

• The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
• It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.

Research notes:

• As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
• There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[https://nbviewer.jupyter.org/github/wikimedia-research/Discussion-tools-analysis-2020/blob/master/Engagement-Metrics/Reply-Tool-Workflow-Engagement-Metrics.ipynb#Reply-Tool-(Wikitext-and-VE)-vs-Full-Page-Wikitext]
• The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[https://dtcheck.toolforge.org/] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
• 30px A large A/B test will start soon.[https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T252057] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.

File:New Discussion Tool v1.0.png prototype.]]

The new tool for starting new discussions (new sections) will join the Discussion tools in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at the end of January. You can try the tool for yourself.[https://patchdemo.wmflabs.org/wikis/3e14959a196db0f7b0c32a35c99dc0fc/w/index.php/Project:Teahouse] You can leave feedback in this thread or on the talk page.

File:White square with question mark.png

During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey Thomas, I just started reading Misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic by China, where I see for instance this study [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7676848/] listed as an example of misinformation spread by the Chinese government, based on these references [https://theconversation.com/could-frozen-food-transmit-covid-19-148735][https://time.com/5899803/coronavirus-frozen-food-china/][https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-frozenfood/chinas-sweeping-covid-controls-put-frozen-food-importers-on-ice-idUSKBN27T0YK][https://www.foodmanufacture.co.uk/Article/2020/08/24/Scientists-claim-Coronavirus-can-remain-on-frozen-and-refrigerated-food-for-three-weeks]. First, does the Biosafety and Health article check out, in your view? And second, are the newspaper / industry critiques sufficient to classify this as misinformation? Sorry, I'm a little out of my depth here. -Darouet (talk) 21:12, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Darouet}} It's probably worth asking over at WT:WikiProject COVID-19. My initial impression is that it seems facts of the study aren't being particularly questioned, but it's interpretation and subsequent usage in decision-making. In that sense, the usage of those subsequent refs are probably reasonable (several seem to be citing a WHO report on the matter, which TBH would be the better ref). As for the first ref, It'd probably be better to include [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-020-12165-1 this one], which has a whole review section on 'Frozen food and cold chain transportation'. However it looks like there's been a lot of overall debate over content over that last week at its talkpage that might also be relevant. Hope that helps! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 03:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

File:BlueIEditShirt-plainBackground.jpeg

Hey Evolution and evolvability,

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandise{{@}}wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!

On behalf of the Merchandise Giveaway program,

-- Vermont (talk) 00:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I strongly apologise to bother you, but if you do not mind, I would like to ask you a favour. Recently, I have created a 'draft' of an article regarding structures described by the Soviet microbiologist V. O. Kalinenko. If you find some time, could you check it, please? Since you are an experienced Wikipedia user as well as an expert in the fields of biochemistry and evolutionary biology, I am really interested in your opinion. Also, please feel free to make some changes, additions and adjustments, if applicable. Thank you very much. --Pinoczet (talk) 13:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Pinoczet}} No problem at all! I've replied over on User talk:Mrjulesd, since I found an existing discussion there and it's probably sensible to centralise. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 02:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

::Thank you for the reply, I appreciate it. Some of the Russian papers are available online, see: [https://www.poznavayka.org/biologiya/biopodobnyie-strukturyi/ Biopodobnyye struktury], [http://zhurnalko.net/=nauka-i-tehnika/tehnika-molodezhi/1964-01--num10 — Можно ли сделать амебу?], [http://zhurnalko.net/=nauka-i-tehnika/tehnika-molodezhi/1964-01--num11 — Нет, амебу сделать нельзя!]. In fact, Kalinenko did not "observe" the structures in distilled water, but rather "obtained" them under the influence of electric current. To my knowledge, these statements were not called into question; the problem was what these structures truly are. As for "caudate rockets", after checking some sources, I am pretty sure it was meant to describe a shape resembling a "tailed" comet. I really felt all this information deserves a standalone Wikipedia article (two primary sources and four secondary sources), but now, it seems not to be the case. Therefore, I decided to give up. Anyway, thanks a lot once again. Kind regards, --Pinoczet (talk) 11:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

File:CYP21Aevolution.png

Hi, Evolution and evolvability!

You have made so many pictures about genetics and genomics, so I would like to ask you to help improve this image.

I drew this picture using the drawing program of windows system. The motivation came from Fig. 1 of that review,{{cite journal |last1=Nebert |first1=DW |last2=Nelson |first2=DR |last3=Adesnik |first3=M |last4=Coon |first4=MJ |last5=Estabrook |first5=RW |last6=Gonzalez |first6=FJ |last7=Guengerich |first7=FP |last8=Gunsalus |first8=IC |last9=Johnson |first9=EF |last10=Kemper |first10=B |title=The P450 superfamily: updated listing of all genes and recommended nomenclature for the chromosomal loci. |journal=DNA (Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.) |date=January 1989 |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=1-13 |doi=10.1089/dna.1.1989.8.1 |pmid=2651058}} which mentioned that human and mouse inactivated CYP21A1 and CYP21A2 into pseudogenes respectively.

A few months later, I added STK19 and TNXB in the upstream and downstream, which doubled in the same tandem repeat event and then inactivated one copy.

I think there are at least two aspect to improve this picture：

1. Color the genes and pseudogenes respectively.
2. Add upstream and downstream genes not repeat in the MHC III, to indicate that this event occurred only in these four gene segments (~80kbp).

I have two other concerns：

1. TNXA and STK19. Are these two pseudogenes inactivated in one event or twice? So I didn't mark inactived on these two pseudogenes.
2. In NCBI rat gene Cyp21a1,{{cite web |title=Cyp21a1 cytochrome P450, family 21, subfamily a, polypeptide 1 [Rattus norvegicus (Norway rat)] - Gene - NCBI |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/24298/ |website=www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov}} Genomic context, I can't find rat CYP21A2P, C4B or TNXB. Is this a gene loss event or a missing annotation?

In sum, I think this is a good example to explain genetic syntenic analysis.--Htmlzycq (talk) 08:15, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

{{reflist_talk}}

::{{re|Htmlzycq}} Thanks for brining this up! It'd be particularly useful for the Synteny article. A few suggestions:

::* Colour usually helps these sorts of images. I recommend keeping it simple, so:

::** Either, plain green for active genes, grey for inactive ones (emphasises the pseudogenisation aspect)

::** Or, 4-colour for each set of genes (perhaps green, green-blue, blue, blue-purple as an aesthetic spectrum, since we're not trying to emphasise the individual genes, just the order); then a light version of that colour for the pseudogenes (also emphasised the duplication aspect)

::* I'm ambivalent about including the upstream and downstream gene. In a way it could make the duplication clearer, but it also adds additional. If the flanking genes are included, it's probably work keeping them in line with the colour scheme of the in-between genes to emphasise, and maybe including "a" and "b" in the duplicated

::* The vertical arrows should probably go from row 2->3 and row 2->4 (not 3->4) since a) both human and mouse evolved from the common ancestor will the full set of 8, rather than the human evolving from the mouse, and b) it's not clear in what order the pseudogenisation occurred.

::* To know whether TNXA and STK19 were inactivated once or twice would probably need some phylogenetics ofa few other related species (to see in which ancestor the inactivation(s) took place), and to look at what the mutations were that inactivated each of them (e.g. if it's a premature stop codon in the same place, then it's more likely to have been a single event)

::* As for the rat, it's hard to tell. You're right that it could just be missing annotations (I notice in [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/1589/ortholog/?scope=32523 this table], that there's a lot of variation on whether orthologs of cyp21a have been detected). The best thing would be to download the region's sequence and do some pairwise alignments to check, and maybe doing some more sensitive BLAST searches.

::*It might be worth saving it as a .svg file so that it's more easily editable

::So that's my thought process for suggestions. Hopefully these are interesting ideas! I'm happy to look at it again if you update it. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 08:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, my mother tongue is not English, so there may be some misunderstanding.

I just uploaded a test version of the gene with color, which adds a line between the ancestral genome and the descendants to reduce misunderstanding. Since I can't edit SVG images, I can't SVG them.

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/403337/ in pig] there is only one STK/C4/CYP21/TNX copy flanked by DXO and ATF6B gene.

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/281741/ in cattle] there are three C4-like gene and one CYP21-like pseudogene (LOC101904057).

This makes me wonder in which generation of common ancestor this tandem repeats took place, Euarchontoglires?--Htmlzycq (talk) 12:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

:After consulting more Euarchontoglires' CYP21 upstream and downstream genes, I pessimistically found that STK/C4/CYP21/TNX tandem repeats in mouse and human genomes may be two independent events, rather than from a common ancestor.

:In [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/116886837/ Rattus rattus (black rat)], [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/114705894/ Peromyscus leucopus (white-footed mouse)] and [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/100356715/ Oryctolagus cuniculus (rabbit)], there is only one STK/C4/CYP21/TNX copy

:In [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/100767691/ Cricetulus griseus (Chinese hamster)] there is one TNX copy downstream

:In some monkey genomes, there are some related pseudogenes, like [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/103221719 CYP21A1P in green monkey] and [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/719797 CYP21A1 in Rhesus monkey], while [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/100395918/ white-tufted-ear marmoset] have one STK/C4/CYP21/TNX copy

It seems that there are two independent evolutionary events, one occurred in the common ancestor of Old World monkeys, and the other is a very recent mouse ancestor, while it's a coincidence that stk19b and tnxa, rather than stk19a and tnxb, became pseudogenes in both human and mouse.--Htmlzycq (talk) 09:57, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Evolution and evolvability!

About the time that this gene duplication (STK/C4/CYP21/TNX) in the mouse genome. There is only one copy was found in the genome of Mus caroli, and two C4 gene ([https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/110335909 LOC110335909] and [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/115062505 LOC115062505]) in the genome of Mus pahari, with a gap in genome sequencing assembly between them. If these three genes (CYP21/TNX/STK19) can appear in this gap, can it be explained that this repeated event occurred in the common ancestor of Mus musculus and Mus pahari mice, rather than the common ancestor of all Mus genus including Mus caroli?

But to my dismay, this conjecture does not match the current taxonomy of Mus, Mus musculus and Mus caroli belong to subgenus Mus, Mus pahari belong to subgenus Coelomys.

--Htmlzycq (talk) 04:20, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:WikiJournal of Psychology, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Liz}} No worries. It'll start to be filled next month, but I understand if it should only be created once an item is ready to be place in. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 01:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I have seen some citation needed tags in your well-edited Catalytic triad article added by an editor. Some tags may or may not be trivial but I have seen entire paragraphs get tagged. Because (I assume) you are an expert on the topic, it would be appreciated if you took care of this. I'm well aware that you could be busy, so take your time. Cheers! Wretchskull (talk) 21:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Wretchskull}} Thanks for pinging me - must've missed those on my watchlist. I'll have a go at working through them this week! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I saw your post on the Magnus talk page. If I understood correctly, do you want to learn easily and quickly about how to use the Wikidata and Listeriabot list?

If so, I've been writing a help page for the Catalan wikipedia (well, I'm still working on it). I had the same problem, because the documentation on the wikidata list is horrible. The only problem ... it's in catalan. You can try reading or requesting translations from Mr Google (pretty good in Catalan-English). See ca:Ajuda:Llistes_automàtiques and ask me if anything is difficult to understand. I hope you find it useful. Salut ! --Amadalvarez (talk) 18:24, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Amadalvarez}} Gràcies for the message! Your summary is nicely organised (I particularly appreciate the diagram in Article on ubiquem la llista automàtica section. Unfortunately, I also need information on how to activate the listeriabot on a new wiki (e.g. if you place {{tlc|Wikidata list}} ... {{tlc|Wikidata list end}} on wikiversity, nothing happens because the bot isn't active there (example). T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk03:03, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

:: Ahhh. Technical set-up !. Sorry it's not my field. It sounds like the bots need to be authorised by an admin to run in a WP (I do not how). May be you'll have better response from a enwiki admin. I'll try to find someone in cawiki. Good luck !. --Amadalvarez (talk) 05:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

:: Sorry, are you admin in wikiversity ? Amadalvarez (talk) 05:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

:::NEWS: I changed invoke to Listeriabot, because it changed server a few months ago. See: wikiversity:special:diff/2262433, I also did a minor change in your SPARQL because left the WHERE. Now, ListeriaBot runs. However doesn't give results, as the query was wrong. I test it in cawiki and it runs well, but no in my wikiversity sandbox. We're closer to the solution.... Amadalvarez (talk) 06:59, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

::::{{re|Amadalvarez}} Thanks for looking at this with me. I've also added a formal bot permission application on Wikiversity (link). I don't know whether the bot is not working on wikiversity due to it not yet having bot permissions, or if there is some file in the [https://github.com/magnusmanske/listeria_rs bot's code] itself that needs to be edited. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 11:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Magic Wand Icon 229981 Color Flipped.svg

Hello! We (the team responsible for the Community Wishlist Survey) have launched the project for OCR improvements. With this project, we aim to improve the experience of using OCR tools on Wikisource. Please refer to our project page, which provides a full summary of the project and the main problem areas that we have identified.

We would love if you could answer the questions below. Your feedback is incredibly important to us and it will directly impact the choices we make. Thank you in advance, and we look forward to reading your feedback! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 03:33, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi User:Evolution and evolvability,

I was wondering how did you choose to rate the Dicke model page as "B" quality and "low" importance?

Best,

Moroses (talk) 11:43, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Moroses}} No problem. Ratings are always tricky, but here was my thinking for the estimate:

:*B-class is the highest quality rating possible without passing through Wikipedia's own internal review process to get GA or FA status. This article is clearly of the highest quality, so this is the effective cap for all PLOS topic pages even though it can seem misleadingly low.

:*Low-importance was much harder to estimate. I checked Wikiproject Physics's guidelines and checked a few related pages. It seems that sub-concepts (e.g. two-state system and superradiant phase transition) are usually mid models (JCM and JCHM) are almost always classed as low. That being said, I'm no physicist so I'm happy to add a request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Physics to ask for rating by a more informed opinion!

:T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 00:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|User:Evolution and evolvability}} I would appreciate it if you could add a request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Physics.

Thanks for the quick and thorough replay,

Moroses (talk) 11:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello there, Thomas! I am writing to you because a new WMF project, Structured Data Across Wikimedia (SDAW), is about to start.

SDAW is a grant-funded programme that will explore ways to structure content on wikitext pages in a way that will be machine-recognizable and -relatable, in order to make reading, editing, and searching easier and more accessible across projects and on the Internet.

The reason why I am contacting you is because of your work across the Wikimedia projects, and your opinion would be of great interest for us to kickstart the discussion. We defined a series of questions we would like to have feedback on. If you want to ask a question on your own, or just want to share with us your ideas or opinions, please feel free to do so!

Also, if you know some other user(s) that can be interested, please let me know or invite them to join the discussion. The more, the better!

Hope to hear from you soon! -- Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Wikipedia mini globe handheld.jpg

Dear editors, developers and friends:

Thank you for supporting Project WikiLoop! The year 2020 was an unprecedented one. It was unusual for almost everyone. In spite of this, Project WikiLoop continued the hard work and made some progress that we are proud to share with you. We also wanted to extend a big thank you for your support, advice, contributions and love that make all this possible.

Head over to our project page on Meta Wikimedia to read a brief 2020 Year in Review for WikiLoop.

Thank you for taking the time to review Wikipedia using [http://doublecheck.wikiloop.org/ WikiLoop DoubleCheck.] Your work is important and it matters to everyone. We look forward to continuing our collaboration through 2021!

María Cruz

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Thomas, I've done a few edits of the OA Australia page advocacy section and made some copy edits. The timeline looks good. I was thinking about putting stuff about copyright reform but then thought it might be a bit off topic. Not sure how much more we need.Amanda Lawrence 13:27, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

:@AmandaSLawrence: Thanks! Perhaps a sentence on the OA-relevant aspects of copyright reform could go in Open access in Australia and then more detail over in Copyright law of Australia? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

:@SMFry and @Vboa oz: Any additional ideas for material to go into Open access in Australia? T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

File:Reply Tool A-B test comment completion.png

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

• Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were [https://wikimedia-research.github.io/Reply-tools-analysis-2021/ more likely] to post a comment on a talk page.
• The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also [https://wikimedia-research.github.io/Reply-tools-analysis-2021/ less likely] to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Andrew Jaspan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Fall.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

:Why are you using AFC at all? If you find a notable article in draft space, then just move it to the mainspace and work on it there. Articles get more attention from more editors when they're in the mainspace. That's why the folks who originally proposed and implemented the draftspace now say that it's where articles go to die. If you don't want it to die, WP:MOVE it out of draftspace. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

{{Talkback|User_talk:Ryan_Vesey|A pagemove back in 2012|ts= Ryan Vesey 22:09, 25 July 2021 (UTC)}}

{{You've got mail}} --Michel Bakni (talk) 19:56, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:Wikipedia articles published in PLOS ONE indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:39, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I apologise to bother you, but if you don't mind, I'd like to ask a question regarding the article Transposable element. I believe it should include some information on the so-called Class III TEs, e.g. Foldback (FB) elements (see: Pierre Capy et al., Dynamics and Evolution of Transposable Elements, 1998). What are your thoughts? Thank you very much. --Pinoczet (talk) 00:30, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

:{{re|Pinoczet}} From a quick overview I think you're right. The classification still seems to be uncommonly used recently though, so it may be worth looking into a little further. E.g. Some papers refer to MITEs as Class III ([https://www.pnas.org/content/115/28/E6650.short example]), whereas others refer to MITEs as Class II ([https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-018-2376-y example]). T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 05:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

::Thank you for the reply. Yes, exactly. To my knowledge, the examples include Foldbacks, TU elements, and MITEs. It seems these transposable elements may be and actually are considered Class III TEs, at least by some researchers. However, I am not sure how this information should be properly added to the article. E.g. whether it deserves a separate subsection, or perhaps just a brief side note would be sufficient? Since I am not an expert in this field, I decided to contact you. Kind regards, --Pinoczet (talk) 04:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

:::{{re|Pinoczet}} I think it's probably worth noting at the end of the Classification section, especially clarifying what the unifying features are as compared to class I and II and noting that the category is not as frequently used as the others. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 08:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:Wikipedia articles published in PLoS ONE indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:49, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svgTemplate:JAN talk has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hello, Evolution and evolvability. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Lauren Gawne, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

File:Red Kitten 01.jpg

THanks for your help on the Carbon article, Thomas <3

Jujublibble (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:Menu icon blue has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg

{{Quote box|quote=

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created, :Template:Paracopy, was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the {{Querylink|Special:Log|qs=type=delete&page=Template%3AParacopy|deleting administrator}}, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:Wikipedia articles published in PLOS ONE indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 17:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:Introduction to tables/tabs has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. User:GKFX^talk 21:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

30px

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :MOS:caption and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 12#MOS:caption until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:38, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:WiR table row has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:WiR table start has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:16, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:WiR table end has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:17, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:Evolution and evolvability/sandbox/styles.css has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 11:26, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for the multilingual newsletter • Local subscription list

File:Junior Contributor New Topic Tool Completion Rate.png

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Enabling the New Topic Tool by default. You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the mw:Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project#Prototype Ready for Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I am teaching a Molecular Biology undergraduate course and in my first session with the students I describe a little of the classical history of the structure of DNA. For some time I have been using my 3D printer to develop models to better illustrate my classes. This experience has been working extremely well as the students have a chance to hold DNA, RNAs and proteins.

I am wondering if you could share with me the pdb file with the structure you built of Linus Pauling's proposed triple-helix of the DNA.

That will be of great value to me in my introductory class.

Thank you in advance, cordially.

Otavio

(thiemann@ifsc.usp.br) 143.107.180.20 (talk) 12:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

:Done! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hey, Evo and evo, I added Banded broadbill to the Wikijournal article nominations page about a month ago, could you move it to Wikijournal preprints soon? AryKun (talk) 06:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

:Thanks for pinging me - I must have missed that. Thanks for flagging. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

File:Desktop Topic Subscriptions median response time.png

The new [{{int:discussiontools-topicsubscription-button-subscribe}}] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) ({{int:Talkpagelinktext}}) 00:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

File:Information.svg Hello, Evolution and evolvability. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Junk DNA, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg

Hello, Evolution and evolvability. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Junk DNA".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion/G13?withJS=MediaWiki:G13-restore-wizard.js&page=Draft%3AJunk+DNA request its undeletion]. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:05, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Can you please create an actual account for {{U|TShafee}}, {{U|Evolution and Evolvability}}, {{u|Thomas Shafee}}, and {{u|Evo & Evo}}? The user pages are showing up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Ownerless pages in the user space because the pages do not have actual user accounts associated with them. I have adjusted the (somewhat confusing) instructions at {{tl|Doppelganger}} to clarify that before the template is applied, a user account should be created. Alternatively, you could request deletion of those pages by placing {{tl|Db-g7}} on the pages. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

:@Jonesey95 Aha, thank you for the clarification (and patience)! That makes sense now. I'll go through and do that. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 23:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

{{font|text=Hello, Evolution and evolvability! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!|font=Times New Roman|size=19px}}
Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this newsletter

This newsletter includes two key updates about the Editing team's work:

1. The Editing team will finish adding new features to the Talk pages project and deploy it.
2. They are beginning a new project, Edit check.

Talk pages project

File:Page Frame Features on desktop.png

The Editing team is nearly finished with this first phase of the Talk pages project. Nearly all new features are available now in the Beta Feature for {{int:discussiontools-preference-label}}.

It will show information about how active a discussion is, such as the date of the most recent comment. There will soon be a new "{{int:skin-action-addsection}}" button. You will be able to turn them off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion. Please tell them what you think.

File:Daily edit completion rates mobile talk pages.png

An A/B test for {{int:discussiontools-preference-label}} on the mobile site has finished. Editors were more successful with {{int:discussiontools-preference-label}}. The Editing team is enabling these features for all editors on the mobile site.

New Project: Edit Check

The Editing team is beginning a project to help new editors of Wikipedia. It will help people identify some problems before they click "{{int:publishchanges}}". The first tool will encourage people to add references when they add new content. Please watch that page for more information. You can join a conference call on 3 March 2023 to learn more.

–Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Hey there,

Thanks for your comment on our draft article! You mentioned that [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666379120302445?via%3Dihub this article] would make for a stronger case in terms of notability of the method but was not cited when it in fact is (inline citation 2). KaranvirSingh 01 (talk) 01:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

:@KaranvirSingh 01: oops - thanks for spotting that! I've updated my comment. If other editors come to consensus it's not too soon, then feel free to also check out WP:WikiJournal article nominations if it would be useful to have an additional avenue for feedback. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 06:18, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

{{User QAIbox/auto|years=Seven}}

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to notify you that :File:DE_cycle.png may violate copyright, as it contains the "recycle bin" icon from Windows 7, or a close lookalike. I wanted to let you know about it, because as a newcomer, I don't know what steps should be taken in this situation. Janhrach (talk) 15:54, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

:@Janhrach Thank you for contacting me, and well spotted. I can't remember where I got the icon from at the time, but it must've just been a google image search. I've replaced it with an equivalent icon from commons! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 12:18, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

::You're welcome. Janhrach (talk) 12:26, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning pn.svg

A tag has been placed on :Category:Wikipedia articles published in peer-reviewed literature (J2W) indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:14, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:23, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

-MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:45, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Good morning E&E, I recently submitted an article to consideration for the WikiJournal of Science. Are there any further steps I need to take in the process or is it all on its own track at this point? Not trying to rush or anything, thank you for your guidance. Fritzmann (message me) 13:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

:@Fritzmann2002 MrMoi38 (talk) 14:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Thomas!

My name is Dr. Renee J Dufault. I am doing a presentation on nutritional epigenetics. I will be discussing the MT gene. Can I please have your permission to use the MT gene figure you created?

I can be reached at rdufault@atsu.edu

Thank you.

Dr. D 147.81.47.181 (talk) 20:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Thomas, we are trying to get in touch as there is life again in the drift draft - are you still there?

Florian & Maya 131.111.5.145 (talk) 16:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm the author of two articles in a refereed academic journal, for which I own the copyright and can release it under CC BY-SA.{{cite Q|Q111367750}}; {{cite Q|Q126116187}}

Can I port them verbatim to Wikipedia? (or update them as I'm porting them)?

FYI, they both began as articles in Wikiversity. The "Externalities" article was extensively revised before submitting for publication; the "Copyrights" article is nearly identical to the Wikiversity original. ;-) DavidMCEddy (talk) 13:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}} DavidMCEddy (talk) 13:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Ambox warning blue.svg:Template:Remove numbers has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 09:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Professor Dr Raja Muhammad Mansha

Chief Warrant Officer

Pakistan Air Force

Lecture Islamabad Model College for Boys G-10/4, Islamabad Raja M Mansha (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Catalytic triad has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:03, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

File:PR icon.png

Hi Evolution and evolvability, you're receiving this message because you were previously listed at the list of volunteers for Wikipedia's peer review process, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 1 year.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the volunteers list, so that the list is kept up to date and editors who do need help can better find active editors. If you become active again and would like to add yourself to the volunteers list again, you can do so at any time by visiting the volunteers list.

Thank you for volunteering to be on the list previously, and all the best on your WikiVoyages!

Category:Inactive peer review volunteer

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:00, 11 November 2024 (UTC)