帮助：学名部分
学名
学名部分仅适用于相关的命名法规定的名称（对动物学，这仅意味着种级单位、属级单位和科级单位的名称）。它至少应该包含分类单元的名称。对等于或低于属级的分类单元，这些名称必须斜体。这是一个科学惯例。该分类单元的名称，其次是认定作者和名称被认可的年份。对于旧的出版物，这等同于出版年。
动物学：Vulpes vulpes Linnaeus, 1758 植物学：Clematis viticella L. (1753)
值得注意的是，作者链接至作者页面，因为维基物种有一整段文章。如何处理作者的名字请参考Help:Author Names。
有时给某个分类单元命名会有一个以上的作者的名字。在这种情况下，使用一个逗号分隔的列表和一个“&”连接最后一个作者。将单个的名称包到链接括号中，而不是所有的作者列表。如果有4个以上的作者建议使用“及其他”的拉丁文缩写“et al.”（et alii）。请注意et al.需用斜体且在結尾加上句点表示縮寫。(請注意在参考文献章节不应使用“et al.”而要列出原始文献的所有作者。在参考文献部分，当您提供的原始来源时，您可以添加作者的完整列表。)
Bacillus novalis Heyrman et al., 2004
围绕一个作者的名字和年份的圆括号只用于表明这个名称是一个随后的组合，而不是描述作者所使用的原始组合。在这种情况下，两个组合都携带了描述作者的名称，但原始组合总是没有圆括号。植物名称通常在一个新的组合后包括修订作者的名字（没有圆括号），但这种做法是不普遍使用在动物学。
动物学：Macracantha arcuata (Fabricius, 1793) 植物学：Clematis alpina (L.) Mill. (1768)
在第一种情况下，Macracantha arcuata是有效名，而由Fabricius给出的原始名称在同物异名下列出。第二种情况，Clematis alpina是最初由Linnaeus发表的另一个名字，后来由Miller修订。
在植物学中，出版物在批准一个分类单元名称时起到了重要作用，因为在法规授予下的有效出版物本身就得到了批准。因此，在当代科学文献中的分类处理总是使用作者，日期和出版物的缩写格式。作为维基物种是一种应将在名称和同物异名的部分使用该公约的科学仪器。在这个维基物种遵循在国际植物名称索引和类似的例如World Checklist of Selected Plant families的网站建立的公约。
植物学：Sciadopitys verticillata (Thunb.) Siebold & Zucc., Fl. Jap. 2(1): 3 (1842).
维基物种已经发展为现在需要在学名部分包括少量重要的附加信息。在动物学中模式产地和正模标本的产地就是例子。在植物学中，分类单元的模式是另一个例子，属的模式种可以被看作是必要的分类信息。
动物学：Wagimo signatus Butler, [1882].
模式产地：Japan, Hokkaido, "Kuramatsunai, August".
正模标本：BMNH (Fenton).
Botany: Vella L., Sp. Pl. 2: 641 (1753).
Type species: Vella pseudocytisus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 641 (1753).
模式产地
一些来源提供关于正模标本的信息。正模标本是认定作者的描述所基于的标本。大多数时候，这是这样的生物第一次被发现。模式产地描述正模标本被发现的地方和环境。给出与你的来源提供的同样多的细节。
模式产地：Ecuador, Esmeraldas Province, Cordillera de Toisán, Río Piedras, Los Pambiles, 00°32'N, 78°38'W, 1200 m高。
术语模式产地只能在种级或更低的分类单元被找到。
模式材料
正模标本（及其他模式材料）有时被保存在博物馆，并使公众能够看到实际上看起来像的标本。当这样的标本被储存起来时，标本就会有一个“标签”，里面有博物馆的编号和博物馆的缩写。这让专家在已经描述的物种上做进一步的研究，并检查该审定作者的描述。所有模式标本在主模式标本页列出。链接应该指向Holotype但会被博物馆缩写的标题掩盖。（单击本节的编辑，查看示例是如何完成的。）
正模标本：EPN 851241.
正模标本只能在种级或种下单位建立（对于高级类群，给出模式种或模式属代替）。如果模式不是正模就使用适当的词（如“选模：”、“新模：”等。）
异名
分类学是一门不断变化的学科，伴随着新的科学发现，命名的有效性可能随之变化。若一个分类单元对应了两个名字，则后一个命名无效，成为同物异名。分类学家有时会基于新的发现将已经命名的物种归到其它属。在这种情况下，种的名字会改变，成为一个新组合(New combination)。严格来说，新组合并不是同物异名，但通常与异名放在同一章节里。异名章节应按年份排列。在植物学中，还要记录原用名（如果有的话）、同模异名、异模异名。
异名章节是名称章节的次级章节。内容用加粗表示。
例如动物学：
=={{int:Name}}==
''Anthene liodes'' ({{a|William Chapman Hewitson|Hewitson}}, 1874).
==={{int:Synonymy}}===
*''Lycaenesthes liodes'' Hewitson, 1874: 349.
*''Lycaena adherbal'' Mabille, 1877: 217. Synonymy in Stempffer, 1967: 192.
*''Anthene liodes'' (Hewitson); Stempffer, 1967: 192. New combination.
另创建Lycaenesthes liodes与Lycaena adherbal页，然后重定向至Anthene liodes页：
#REDIRECT [[Anthene liodes]]
例如植物学：
=={{int:Name}}==
''Pinus clausa'' ({{aut|Chapman}} ex {{aut|Engelm.}}) {{aut|Vasey}} & {{aut|Sarg.}}, Rep. for. N. America 199. (1884)
==={{int:Synonyms}}===
{{BA}}
**''Pinus inops'' var. ''clausa'' {{aut|Chapm.}} ex {{aut|Engelm.}}, Bot. Gaz. 2: 125. (1877)
{{HOT}}
**''Pinus inops'' subsp. ''clausa'' ({{aut|Chapm.}} ex {{aut|Engelm.}}) {{aut|Engelm.}}, Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 4: 177. (1880)
**''Pinus virginiana'' subsp. ''clausa'' ({{aut|Chapm.}} ex {{aut|Engelm.}}) {{aut|Eckenw.}}, Conifers World: 647. (2009)
{{HET}}
**''Pinus clausa'' var. ''immuginata'' {{aut|D.B.Ward}}, Castanea 28: 4. (1963)
**''Pinus clausa'' subsp. ''immuginata'' ({{aut|D.B.Ward}}) {{aut|A.E.Murray}}, Kalmia 13: 22. (1983)
使用示例
全部学名部分将被规定格式为：
=={{int:Name}}==
''Glomus przelewicense'' {{a|Janusz Błaszkowski|Błaszk.}}, 1988.
Host-Substratum/Locality: From soil under ''[[Thuja occidentalis]]'': Poland
Holotype: {{Repository link|DPP}} 578
==={{int:Synonyms}}===
* ''Glomus przelewicensis'' {{aut|Błaszk.}}, 1988
* ''Diversispora przelewicensis'' {{a|Fritz Oehl|Oehl}}, 2011
当保存或预览时，这将显示为：
学名
Glomus przelewicense Błaszk., 1988.
宿主基质/产地：Thuja occidentalis下土壤中: Poland
正模：DPP 578
异名
- Glomus przelewicensis Błaszk., 1988
- Diversispora przelewicensis Oehl, 2011
作者模板
也可依序使用{{a}}和{{aut}}模板替换作者名称，它们会自动使用小写字母格式化作者姓名。{{a}} 模板还会为作者姓名添加维基链接，而 {{aut}} 模板则不会：
=={{int:Name}}==
''Glomus przelewicense'' {{a|Janusz Błaszkowski|Błaszk.}}, 1988
Host-Substratum/Locality: From soil under ''[[Thuja occidentalis]]'': Poland
Holotype: {{Repository link|DPP}} 578
==={{int:Synonyms}}===
* ''Glomus przelewicensis'' {{aut|Błaszk.}}, 1988
在保存之后会显示为：
学名
Glomus przelewicense Błaszk., 1988
Host-Substratum/Locality: From soil under Thuja occidentalis: Poland
同模： DPP 578
同物异名
- Glomus przelewicensis Błaszk., 1988
Special: Reptile and Amphibian Nomenclature
- Names coined by Hoser: The nomenclatural chaos and taxonomic destabilization perpetrated by Hoser (2013, 2014a,b, 2018a,b, and multiple other works as documented in Wüster et al. 2021) has led to unprecedented scientific community reaction and rejection of the works in question. Hoser has repeatedly and continuously circumvented conventional and acceptable standards of scientific analysis and peer-review in his broadly sweeping and extensive self-produced taxonomies and nomenclatures. Though only coining 15 new turtle nomina to date, Hoser has attempted to promulgate a total of 1795 new taxon names (1453 reptiles, 290 frogs, 46 mammals, 4 spiders, and 2 fish) from 2000 through January 2021 (Wüster et al. 2021). We regard his actions as disruptive and unwarranted acts of nomenclatural destabilization in defiance of the guiding principles of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature to promote nomenclatural stability (ICZN 1999), and also in contravention of its own recommended Code of Ethics. Further, we do not regard the self-produced documents circulated under the name Australasian Journal of Herpetology as objective scientific publications (Kaiser et al. 2013; Kaiser 2014; Rhodin et al. 2015; Wüster et al. 2021).
- In collaboration with a wide leadership group representing the global herpetological and zoological communities, we petitioned the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) to use its plenary power to declare and treat Hoser’s works as nomenclaturally unavailable (Rhodin et al. 2015). In response, the ICZN (2021) has now issued an opinion on this and related petitions, in which the Commissioners declined to either formally confirm or reject the availability of Hoser’s names and self-produced works, and also indicated that they had no authority to uphold their own Code of Ethics.
- As a result of this opinion by ICZN, and in view of Hoser’s numerous nomenclaturally destabilizing novelties and confrontational unethical practices, we therefore now agree with and follow the recommendation by Wüster et al. (2021), including their 464 supportive zoologist signatories, to follow the scientific community’s outright rejection of Hoser’s work as being unscientific and disruptive, and the community’s strong support and acceptance of new replacement names (aspidonyms) as valid. We also agree with the analysis and recommendations by Krell (2021), who suggested that prevailing usage within the scientific community could serve as a potential solution to the problems created by Hoser’s approach. We therefore now regard all of Hoser’s turtle names as nomina rejecta and accept such replacement aspidonyms as are validly published, available, and scientifically justified based on best available objective analysis and peer-review.
Turtle Taxonomy Working Group. In press (2021). Turtles of the World: Annotated Checklist and Atlas (9th Ed.). Chelonian Research Monographs No. 8.
Reptile Database
The Reptile Database, the largest reptile checklist used here significantly has also released a statement saying they will not use names coined through taxonomic vandalism.
Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 20:58, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
References
- Krell, F.-T. 2021. Suppressing works of contemporary authors using the Code's publication requirements is neither easy nor advisable. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 78(1): 61–67. DOI: 10.21805/bzn.v78.a021 BiooneReference page.
- Wüster, W., Thomson, S.A., O'Shea, M. & Kaiser, H. 2021. Confronting taxonomic vandalism in biology: conscientious community self-organization can preserve nomenclatural stability. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 133(3): 645–670. DOI: 10.1093/biolinnean/blab009 BJLSReference page.
- Kaiser, H., Crother, B.I., Kelly, C.M.R., Luiselli, L., O’Shea, M., Ota, H., Passos, P., Schleip, W.D. & Wüster, W. 2013. Best practices: in the 21st Century, taxonomic decisions in herpetology are acceptable only when supported by a body of evidence and published via peer-review. Herpetological Review 44(1): 8–23. PDF
Reference page. - Rhodin, A.G.J., Kaiser, H., van Dijk, P.P., Wüster, W., O’Shea, M., Archer, M., Auliya, M., Boitani, L., Bour, R., Clausnitzer, V., Contreras-MacBeath, T., Crother, B.I., Daza, J.M., Driscoll, C.A., Flores-Villela, O., Frazier, J., Fritz, U., Gardner, A.L., Gascon, C., Georges, A., Glaw, F., Grazziotin, F.G., Groves, C.P., Haszprunar, G., Havaš, P., Hero, J-M., Hoffmann, M., Hoogmoed, M.S., Horne, B.D., Iverson, J.B., Jäch, M., Jenkins, C.L., Jenkins, R.K.B., Kiester, A.R., Keogh, J.S., Lacher, Jr., T.E., Lovich, J.E., Luiselli, L., Mahler, D.L., Mallon, D., Mast, R., McDiarmid, R.W., Measey, J., Mittermeier, R.A., Molur, S., Mosbrugger, V., Murphy, R.W., Naish, D., Niekisch, M., Ota, H., Parham, J.F., Parr, N.J., Pilcher, N.J., Pine, R.H., Rylands, A.B.., Sanderson, J.G., Savage, J.M., Schleip, W., Scrocchi, G.J., Shaffer, H.B., Smith, E.N., Sprackland, R., Stuart, S.N., Vetter, H., Vitt, L.J., Waller, T., Webb, G., Wilson, E.O., Zaher, H. & Thomson, S. 2015. Comment on Spracklandus Hoser, 2009 (Reptilia, Serpentes, Elapidae): request for confirmation of the availability of the generic name and for the nomenclatural validation of the journal in which it was described. Case 3601. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 72(1): 61–78. PDF. Reference page.
| ← Taxonavigation section | Name section/zh | Reference section → |