User talk:Needsmoreritalin

❧

Ancienty History

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Red knot (2)

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:Rufa red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) in Delaware Bay, New Jersey.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Social flycatcher

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:Social Flycatcher.png, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Grey plover

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:BBPlover Scarborough Marsh.png, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Golden-crowned kinglet

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:Golden-Crowned Kinglet EBFNWR.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:48, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Brewer's sparrow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Las Cruces. 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) 07:58, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

April 2025

Hi Needsmoreritalin! I noticed that you recently made an edit at Red fox and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 09:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Ok, but I added a featured picture to the species box. Did the edit have to be reverted because it was labeled as minor? Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

No, it looks like it was reverted by another editor who took the view that a second infobox image was "not required".

I just wanted to let you know about what minor edits are meant for. Belbury (talk) 19:12, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Oh, ok. That's cool. I have adjusted my behavior since your note and I appreciate the feedback. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 19:40, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Please do revert yourself

You may do the reverting yourself. I'm done of trying to help. Until the dispute resolution come to a decision, I will not do edits from today onwards, not anymore. Sorry for all the trouble I caused. Protector100 (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I cannot undo that edit. You have to. I understand that you are a new user and that there is a lot to navigate. But if you revert the edits back to the Status Quo Antebellum then you won't be in violation of the Wikipedia:3RR. However, if I revert it, then I would be in violation of the same policy.

That's why I was pleading with you not to make any changes pending the outcome of the dispute. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:45, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:03, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Image

Please, please. Almost every image have issues. We will just wait for the moderator to launch Rfc. Protector100 (talk) 01:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I understand that. And I am willing to let there be an RFC. I suggested that you bring this to dispute resolution because this is a difference of opinions. You did start a talk topic on the Snowy Owl page. Only I replied. And what I said was that if you felt an image improves the article, then add it. But I believe the Snowy with teh duck is superior to the other images.

Text is not a good conveyor of tone. I can only assume when you read what I have written that you read it like I am yelling at you. I want to assure you that I am not. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

There's no such thing as superiority in images. No one is perfect, let alone image. You confirmed that the owl with duck is juvenile male. Protector100 (talk) 03:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

That is fundamentally untrue. What is better, and not just on this particular set of images, but in general:

A sharp image of a wildlife subject, or a soft/blurry subject?

Color that reflects the actual appearance of the subject vs flat or oversaturated?

A large image that shows details or a small image that does not?

A properly exposed image, underexposed or overexposed?

An image that is clean or one that has digital noise or artifacts?

An unobstructed view or one that partially blocks the subject?

The snowy owl with the duck is well exposed, accurately depicts the subject, in action, with prey. It is equivalent in size to the most recent images you proposed and shows all of the necessary field marks, etc. etc.

The original image you proposed as a replacement (Bubo_scandiacus_male_Muskegon.jpg) was very small, overexposed and lacked clarity and detail. You can't make out any feather detail, and there is little contrast; everything is white.

The male image you want now is underexposed. You cannot see the eye color. The female image was taken with a wide angle lens and this distorts the appearance of the owl.

Yes, I made a judgement call that it is a young male. It was an irruptive year, and it was in Southern Maine. But it could be an adult female. I don't think it is, but you cannot tell. Do the research, see if there is a reliable way to tell, there isn't.

What is your issue with the image with the duck? Is it the duck? Is the image too graphic?

Are you a photographer? Am I using terms that carry any weight or do you judge an image on how you see it rather than considering any of technical issues? Here are some other snowy shots, including images from an owl release with Project Snowstorm's Norm Smith. | Snowy Owl images Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:29, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I do not live in the Western part of the world. And I do not know how to upload images to Wikipedia. And please don't start that original proposal again, as you said, it is indeed poor. Thus, I bowed down to your wishes to find FP, POTD, and QI image. About the male image you said underexposed, if you want to blame, blame those people who named it FP and POTD in the first place. Not every lead images of articles are perfect. I said it, my issue is not the duck nor graphic, but the owl itself, which is a juvenile. The website | Snowy Owl images supported the claim: One of the images is similar to yours, and the words "young male owl". First, you made a judgement call that it is young male, but now you said it could be adult female. Do you know what this is? Forgive me for saying this, if I do offend you, I apologise: This is false advertising. Also, there is no rule against having an image showing an animal in captivity as lead image, is there? And there is no rule requiring that the lead image must be image which draw readers in to read articles, is there? Not everyone wants to read articles about owl species, take the Africans, especially those of Kenya, who see owls as ill omens. This was all stated in the symbolism and mythology section of the Owl page. Protector100 (talk) 14:52, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

You have not offended me. I don't want you to think that you have. I am trying to understand your perspective, but I still don't.

The website that I sent you, is my own. The images you saw and the captions that accompanied them were all my work. I have 100's of images of Snowy Owls from Maine, some from New Hampshire, some from Massachusetts, New Jersey and even in Philadelphia.

Cornell University is the leading US institution for ornothology.

Cornell Lab of Ornithology Lists Adult Female / Immature with one image.

I think we can resolve our impasse. The Snowy with the duck as image 1 in the info box, the adult male in captivity as image 2 in the info box, with a caption that indicates that immature Snowy's and female snowy's look the same. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

I'll consider it. Also, take a look at this: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roar-Solheim/publication/354162037_Aging_Snowy_Owls_Bubo_scandiacus_based_on_wing_feather_molt_patterns_Preliminary_results_from_ongoing_field_studies_for_ISOWG_Snowy_Owl_scientists/links/61288cf6c69a4e48795e0749/Aging-Snowy-Owls-Bubo-scandiacus-based-on-wing-feather-molt-patterns-Preliminary-results-from-ongoing-field-studies-for-ISOWG-Snowy-Owl-scientists.pdf. Juvenile snowy owls are much smaller than the adults And females are bigger than males. Protector100 (talk) 01:38, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but these are subadults. They are full-size. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 03:19, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe we can resolve this ourselves, without RFC. I will give you answer one week later. Because I have important things to do right now, I will not be available till next week. Please tell the moderator to put on hold. See you then. Protector100 (talk) 13:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I'll go by your decision. The adult male and owl with duck as lead images. I have a suggestion, the adult male in captivity as image 1 and owl with duck as image 2. But if it really means that much to you, then owl with duck as image 1 and adult male as image 2. You decide. This will be settled without Rfc then. Protector100 (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for this compromise. I will make the changes. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Heislerville Wildlife Management Area has been accepted

Heislerville Wildlife Management Area, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. 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!

Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:11, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Harlequin duck

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:Drake Harlequin duck (Histrionicus histrionicus) perched on a rock in the Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, USA.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Night heron

Just curious if you got that shot at the Ocean City Welcome Center. I've only been down to Cape May a couple times, but one of the times I stopped at the welcome center just because it was listed as a popular hotspot, not expecting anything unusual. Didn't have high expectations as I parked right there by the highway, but it's ... quite a spectacle. I was thinking about heading down again sometime in the next couple weeks to maybe see some little herons/ibises wandering around. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I actually sent you a message a long time ago. On your talk page you listed an email address. I live 1hr from there. Its a little late in the season now. There are some nestlings and some fledged birds. Sadly, its been a go to spot for over 10 years, for Black and Yellow crowned Night Herons, but the White Ibis came in about 2017 and each year more of them, choking out the BCNH and YCNH and the Glossy Ibis. White Ibis dominate now, with Great and Snowy Egrets. Maybe one or two pairs of Little Blues and a Tri-Color. Still a great spot you can spend most of a day at. Two nesting pairs of oystercatchers too, and the occasionally Peregrine too, Not too far away is the Forsythe Refuge, another gem. You're in Brooklyn, right? If you ever want to plan ahead I'd be glad to join you. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 01:46, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Hmm. I went back and looked for an email by your username and last name and didn't find either. Sorry about that. Unfortunately I haven't been able to get down there after all. Living in NYC, I don't own a car, so a road trip is a little bit of a production. Do you have a sense of when everybody clears out of the welcome center? So did the white ibis push the smaller herons out? Or do you think they're both just shifting upward? Likewise if you're up in NYC and want some birding, let me know. Don't know if you've seen, but Wikiconference North America is in NYC this year during fall migration. I'm sure I'll wind up recruiting some wikibirders for a trip to Central Park at some point. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 17:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion

Hi there. I forgotten to add in the suggestion: Should we let the adult male snowy owl be the image 1? Almost all image 1s of the animals are males, like moose, gaur, lion, mandarin duck, Andean condor, walrus, red deer, peafowls etc.Protector100 (talk) 13:37, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

A deal is a deal. You agreed to it being image one. There is no need to change it. It was just the photo of the day in Vietnam on Sunday and it came in #15 in the Photo of the year competition. Just leave it alone. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 19:36, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I only agreed that two images served as infobox images, albeit with suggestion. Months ago, I did suggest that the adult male in captivity as image 1 and owl with duck as image 2. But I did not bother much at that time, as I was preoccupied with other things. Sorry, it's nothing personal, it's following the rules as with articles of animals mentioned above. Don't have to let deals to tie us all down. And the good thing is the owl with duck still stays as main imageProtector100 (talk) 00:47, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

"But if it really means that much to you, then owl with duck as image 1 and adult male as image 2. You decide. This will be settled without Rfc then" - You wrote that on May 30, you can see that on this page in the section below the heading labeled "image." Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

Yes, because I was preoccupied with other important situations, and did not think much. "This will be settled without Rfc then" - What I mean is, the whole main image issues will be settled without Rfc. It is a reference to "Maybe we can resolve this ourselves, without RFC". Protector100 (talk) 04:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

If you'll notice since the last discussion my image has received even more accolades. I don't understand your fixation with this image and this page. You have made very limited contributions to Wikipedia, most of them related to fictional characters.

We had an agreement. It doesn't matter that you offered the terms and then became preoccupied with something else. You made the offer and I accepted with a caveat that was also part of your offer. After our agreement you changed the photos anyway, in June. I reverted the edit in July when I became aware of it. Now you want to dig up the past. Feel free to open the dispute again if you must, but I'd recommend you move on from this. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 06:11, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

I made the offer by giving suggestion that image one be adult male and image two be subadult/adult female. It's my mistake for changing photos without discussing with you first, I apologise for that. "You have made very limited contributions to Wikipedia, most of them related to fictional characters" - I joined Wikipedia on 21 Dec 2024. Anyone in Wikipedia can edit whatever articles they liked, that is so long as they follow the rules in Wikipedia. I joined Wikipedia is to state facts according to the rules. "If you'll notice since the last discussion my image has received even more accolades" - Forgive me for saying this, but I think you had become a little carried away when you received more applause for your image. You are a very good image creator. If I were like you, I mean, if I created an image depicts the female of a certain species, and if it is named as FI or POTD, I would like to use that image as one of the main images, that is only as image two, behind the male image. Even I were like you, I still follow the examples of the articles of animals mentioned above. I do not receive or expect rewards for all the contributions and sacrifices I made to this Wikipedia. "I don't understand your fixation with this image and this page" - I already said it, it's nothing personal, it's following the examples of the articles of animals mentioned above, where image one as adult male, and image two as adult female, subadult, or female with young. And, it's there any rule saying that image with many accolades should be image 1? I may open up the dispute. Protector100 (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate that you acknowledge that you should not have made that edit without discussion. But this is absurd - "You should be glad that your image is one of the main images." Really? The image was the main image without dispute before you started your edit war. And I was not the only one to revert your changes.

If you feel so strongly about this you can reopen the dispute, but read up on Wikipedia policies. I tried to prevent you from a 3 edit rule violation, and I referred you to the dispute resolution because you were unaware of the proper ways to edit Wikipedia. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 13:10, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

"You should be glad that your image is one of the main images" - You are right, I used the wrong sentence, sorry about this. Just forget about this sentence. Just read my last message yesterday, the whole message, I already made it out that it's nothing personal. Protector100 (talk) 14:49, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

But when you write stuff like that it feels personal and then you tell me to disregard it. Look, if I shot your front door with a bow and arrow, and then pulled the arrow back, there is still a hole in your door even though I took it back. Words are like that too. I take great pride in providing high quality images to Wikipedia and I give up my rights to profit from my images when I do that.

You have opinions, you are entitles to them. But Wikipedia is a community. If you post on the talk page and you get consensus things progress. Let me give you an example:

Least Sandpiper Talk Page - Read the Infobox thread There was discussion and proposed changes here. The default image is still there, two month later, but we are trying to engage in a discussion and decide as a group.

If you want to open the discussion you may not get a response immediately, but if there is participation and there is support to move in one direction or another, that's how the community is supposed to work. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

I already messaged Robert McClenon about this. And I posted new announcement at the snowy owl talk page. You may join in the discussion at the talk page, and Robert will launch a new RFC. Protector100 (talk) 02:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

I have responded to the post from Robert asking if we discussed the topic and requested Stare Decisis. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Why do we need this "stare decisis"? What does it do anyway? Protector100 (talk) 06:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Stare decisis is a legal principle to let a decision stand. This issue was debated and resolved. There is no need to reopen and reargue it. It was settled. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:31, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, but I think a new DRN may be opened for this. Let's discuss right at the snowy owl talk page rather than here. Protector100 (talk) 01:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

If you review the notice on Robert's talk page when he closed the RFC "First, I haven't seen an explanation of why an RFC to change the order of the two photographs is in order. I don't see an explanation either that a previous agreement should be changed or that a previous agreement has not been followed."

I know you probably view me as an adversary, but I am not. I tried to help you understand wikipedia policies. I mentioned the WP:3RR, I pointed you in the direction of dispute resolution, I explained the status quo antebellum. Please review the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia. Please read the boomerang essay.

We had a dispute. It was resolved on May 31. On June 17th, you made an edit that violated that agreement. Eventually I saw that you made the change, I returned the images to the positions agreed to on May 31. This issue is resolved. If you open a DRN, I will respond. The edit history is on the record. I don't understand why you won't let this go. Do you understand there are only TWO images of Snowy Owls that are Featured Pictures on Wikipedia and Two on Wikimedia Commons? There are three separate images, only the lead image 1 is a featured Picture on both sites. What are you trying to accomplish? What is your end game? Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

I already spoke my words in the snowy owl talk page. Protector100 (talk) 04:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

You know what. I will not be bothered with that case anymore. The case is closed. Protector100 (talk) 06:55, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, but I need one more thing from you. You posted this on my talk page, but since you opened up Planning to Launch an RFC on the Snowy Owl Talk page, you need to post your concession there. That is the proper venue. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 18:38, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lesser scaup

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status

Your image, File:Drake Lesser Scaup (Aythya affinis) Barengat Inlet, New Jersey, USA.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:11, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 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) 00:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)