Welcome to Wikispecies!

Hello, and welcome to Wikispecies! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:

If you have named a taxon, then it is likely that there is (or will be) a Wikispecies page about you, and other pages about your published papers. Please see our advice and guidance for taxon authors.

If you have useful images to contribute to Wikispecies, please upload them at Wikimedia Commons. This is also true for video or audio files containing bird songs, whale vocalization, etc.

Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username (if you're logged in) and the date. Please also read the Wikispecies policy What Wikispecies is not. If you need help, ask me on my talk page, or in the Village Pump. Again, welcome!

Autopatrolled rights edit


Dear Hector Bottai, You have been granted autopatrolled user rights, which may be granted to experienced Wikispecies users who have demonstrated an understanding of Wikispecies policies and guidelines. In addition to what registered users can do, autopatrollers can have one's own edits automatically marked as patrolled (autopatrol). The autopatrol user right is intended to reduce the workload of new page patrollers and causes pages created by autopatrolled users to be automatically marked as patrolled. For more information, read Wikispecies:Autopatrollers.

  This user has autopatrolled rights on Wikispecies. (verify)

You may as autpatroller use the autopatroller user box on your user page. Copy and paste the following code on your user page:

{{User Autopatroller}}

Dan Koehl (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Patrolling rights edit

After you were granted patroller user rights, it seems you did zero patrolling. (since you are autopatroller, the pages you edit gets automatically marked. But if you have patrolled pages , and marked them patrolled, your edit gets a "marked revision (number) of page (page name) patrolled")

If you dont wish to patrol pages, this is no problem at all, but please inform me if you tried and experienced any difficaulties, or if you have any questions.

Since you have not made use of your patroller user rights, I need to know if you still want to keep them, because you plan to use them in the future, or likevise. If you are not interested in patrolling, you dont need to do anything, and I will remove the user rights in a couple of days.

In any case you will keep your autopatrol user right, but there is no need for both.

But please consider carrying out daily patrols of new pages and edits made by users who are not autopatrolled.

If you want to try to patrol pages:

In Special:NewPages you can see the not patrolled new pages with yellow background. Presently there are probably none, since the pages made today and the last days has been made by users who already have 'autopatrolled' user rights. But if you do, or you choose to see the last 500 newly made pages, you may se files with yellow background. You can click on such a file, and scroll down to absolute down-right corner, where you can read "mark as patrolled" or similair, becasue the contributor does not have autoptarolled/patrolled user rights. When you click on the link, the file becomes patrolled.

But theres older files that need patrolling. In unpatrolled pages on recent changes, and you will see a list of unpatrolled pages. You will see a red colored ! in front of the unpatrolled file. If you click on each diff, you can mark the diff patrolled.

Dan Koehl (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for any confusion. Please see this list, can you see pages marked with yellow background? And roughly, how many, more than 1, 10, 50? (this may depend on dates of creation of the page, and the date you had the user rights) Dan Koehl (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Hector, here is a diff] which I hope you can see the "Mark as patrolled" link. Please patrol that link, so we can see that its working. Dan Koehl (talk) 12:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Presently theres six articles you try to patrol, but they may be patrolled when you are online here agin. But with the link below you can see if there are any unpatrolled files, if its yellow and have numbers in fron of it. Good luck!
1680 not patrolled edits (its even more than five!)
Dan Koehl (talk) 12:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Hector it seems you didn't succeed in patrolling. On one side its important that as many users as possible are patrollers, to keep all the new pages and new edits to old pages reviewed, on the other hand there no sense for a user to have patrollers right, if you never use them, and don't have an ambition to use them in the future. But since you announced you wanted to patrol, I haven't removed those rights. If you still have any questions about how to patrol, I d be happy to answer them. Dan Koehl (talk) 11:35, 1 April 2015 (UTC)Reply

Geothlypis edit

Hola Hector - the former subspecies of Geothlypis aequinoctialis have been split - see IOC, which is the international global authority followed by Wikispecies (and most other wikipedias). - MPF (talk) 00:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

@MPF: Hi MPF, thanks for your note. I know the split adopted by IOC and not by AOU/SACC or Clements, followed by EN and ES Wikis. What I was trying to do in this case is accomodate both: 1. Leave at the genus page and open the missing splitted pages, 2. Create redirections for the former subspecies, 3. Leave the former ssp until major classifications arrive to a common agreement, with a note on the discussion page and using the template:disputed. I have done this in some cases. Let me know your thoughts. Regards. --Hector Bottai (talk) 01:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Publications" template edit

Hello Hector Bottai. Please note that the {{Publications}} template is flawed and/or contains code currently incompatible with the server software, and therefore shouldn't be used until the problems are resolved. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC).Reply

Thanks @Tommy Kronkvist:, didn't know that.--Hector Bottai (talk) 10:39, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply
That's okay – we're only humans, and can't know everything… :-) The troubles with the template has been discussed at the Village Pump, here: Template Publications. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC).Reply

Admin? edit


Dear, Hector Bottai! Would you accept to be an Administrator on Wikispecies? Wikispecies need more Administrators and presently there is only 22 out of 250 active users.
Please see Administrators for information about Admins rights. If you are positive, I can nominate you on the requests for adminship on your behalf.

Dan Koehl (talk) 19:40, 1 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks @Dan Koehl:, I accept to be an Administrator.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:18, 1 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Administrator rights edit


Dear Hector Bottai, You have been granted administrator user rights, congratulations!

Admin userbox on Wikispecies edit

  This user is an administrator on Wikispecies. (verify)

Administrators may use the administrator user box on their user page. Copy and paste the following code to your user page:

{{User Admin}}

Userbox on EnWp and Meta-Wiki edit

Theres also a Wikispecies userbox which you can use on the English Wikipedia, located at en:Template:User admin Wikispecies.

If you have a Meta Wiki user page, you can put the Wikispecies admin user box for Meta on your Meta-Wiki user page.

Dan Koehl (talk) 12:44, 8 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks @Dan Koehl:, I will do my best.--Hector Bottai (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Duplicated author names edit

I reverted your recent edit removing duplicated author names for this reason: That was erratum citation from Zootaxa, and their style in dealing with errata is with boldface authorship of original article. Removing it alters citation, and leaves confusing results. Neferkheperre (talk) 09:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks @Neferkheperre: for let me know that.--Hector Bottai (talk) 16:17, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Application for Checkuser edit

Referring to earlier discussions regarding a local Checkuser policy, I herebye apply to get Checkuser user rights, although we havnt reached a consensus reg Checkuser policy, but I want to give it a try if I can get the required votes. For a request to succeed a minimum of 25 support votes and an 80% positive vote are required (subject to the normal bureaucrat discretion). Requests for checkuser run for two weeks, and I ask kindly that somone starts the poll, like we do for adminship applications.

Please also note that CheckUser actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Checkusers. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two checkusers, for mutual accountability. I dont want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for checkuser.

My request to the Wikispecies community is here

Dan Koehl (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Another application for Check User edit

As pointed out above by User:Dan Koehl, we need at least two Check Users for this wiki. I am nominating myself and would be happy to receive any feedback that you have to give (positive, negative, or neutral). Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Koavf. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Third application for checkuser edit

Further to recent messages, I am also offering to serve, so that we have three checkuser operators, to ensure adequate coverage in case one of the others is unavailable. Please comment at Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Pigsonthewing. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:47, 28 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Additional Checkuser Application edit

I also have added my name to those willing to be a checkuser. Please see my application here Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Faendalimas. I listed this yeasterday but have been encouraged to do a mass mail. I would also take the opportunity to make sure everyone knows that any editor can vote but that it is imperative that as many do as possible, for all 4 of the current applicants, please have your say. Checkuser voting has strict policy rules regarding number of votes. You will have other messages from the other Users concerned you can also read about it in the discussion on the Village Pump - Wikispecies:Village_Pump#Application_for_Checkuser. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Standing for role of checkUser edit

Like some of our colleagues (who I support), I am offering to serve as a checkuser, not least to ensure adequate coverage in case one of the others is unavailable.

Please comment at Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Pigsonthewing.

[Apologies if you receive a duplicate notification; I wasn't aware of Wikispecies:Mail list/active users, and sent my original notification to the list of administrators instead.] MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

RFC on Checkusers edit

With one week to go I wanted to remind everyone of the importance of voting on the current CheckUser applications. They can all be found together on a single RFC: Wikispecies:Requests_for_Comment#Checkusers.

It is extremely important with votes such as this for everyone to be involved. There are strict rules in the Wikimedia Foundation Policy guidelines on these votes. I would urge people to have a good understanding of what a CheckUser does. This can be read up on here on the page discussing CheckUser's Wikispecies:Checkusers. Links on this page will take you to other policy information on Meta, HowTo for our site etc.

I would also urge people to look at our own policy development and some past discussion on this can be found here: Wikispecies_talk:Local_policies#Local_CU_Policy.

Wikispecies has in the past had issues that has required the intervention that is supported by the ability to do a CheckUser. Many of us are aware of this. The capacity to do this ourselves greatly speeds up this process. Although SockPuppetry can sometimes be identified without using a CheckUser in order to do the necessary steps to stop it or even prevent it requires evidence. We all know that sockpupets can do significant damage.

This is an important step for Wikispecies. It is a clear demonstration we can run ourselves as a Wiki Project part of Wiki Media Foundation. When I and several others first discussed this we knew it would be difficult at the time to meet all the criteria. We have only now decided to try and get this feature included in Wikispecies. By doing this it can lead to other areas where Wikispecies can further develop its own policies. In some areas we have unique needs, different to the other Wiki's. It is timely we were able to develop all these policies.

Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 4 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Philherodius pileatus edit

Hi Hector Bottai,
could you also please check this page: Philherodius (contains a redlink now). Thank you --Murma174 (talk) 12:58, 10 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Request for vote reg use of BASEPAGENAME edit

The previous discussions regarding if we should subst:ing BASEPAGENAME and change all [[BASEPAGENAME]] into [[susbt:BASEPAGENAME]] did not really reach a consensus.

Please vote here on the Village pump!

If you are not sure on your opinion, you can read and join the discussion about the claimed advantages and disadvantages of using BASEPAGENAME

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikispecies Oversighter edit

Wikispecies has no local Oversighter. Since I had the communitys confidence regarding the previous application for Checkusers rights, as per local Oversight policy on META, I hereby apply to get Oversighters user rights, as a request to the Wikispecies community.

Application is located at Requests for Comment.

Please also note that Oversighter actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Oversighters. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two oversighters, for mutual accountability. I don't want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for oversighters rights.

Dan Koehl through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Oversight nomination edit

Please refer to Wikispecies:Oversighters/Requests/Koavf for a second Oversight nomination. Note that we must have at least two Oversigthers in order for anyone to have these user rights. All feedback is welcome. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Village Pump rollback edit

Hello Hector Bottai. What was the reason for your rollback of my Village Pump edit? Please explain. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 05:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC).Reply

Hello @Tommy Kronkvist:. My apologies. It didn't even know that I did! Probably I passed my finger there when reading in a tablet. Sorry.--Hector Bottai (talk) 10:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
No worries. If the rollback would have been made by a new user or IP I would have suspected vandalism, but since you are an experienced user I figured it was an honest mistake. Had to ask though, in the event that I had actually done something wrong without knowing it myself... :-)
Happy editing! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:29, 2 May 2017 (UTC).Reply

ERRATUM citations edit

I rolled back your recent edit of my Zootaxa erratum citation. Reason: That is how errata are cited in Zootaxa. Cumbersome, but clear. Neferkheperre (talk) 07:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Neferkheperre: Understand...but is awfull.--Hector Bottai (talk) 11:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Nice picture! edit

You made a nice picture of the Southern Chestnut-tailed Antbird! Thanks, Henrik --Hwdenie (talk) 07:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Template:Taxa authored 2 edit

Hello Hector Bottai, in using template "Taxa authored 2": please note that adding the option |g=f means "gender=feminine". This option is needed for grammatically correct translations in some languages. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 21:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Thiotrix: Thanks, did not know that! Several places to correct..:-( --Hector Bottai (talk) 21:11, 27 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Teretistridae Baird, 1864? edit

to search I can not find the Name Teretistridae in the Primary references Baird S.F. 1864. Review of American birds. Part 1. North and Middle America. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 181:vii + 478. Is that the correct work https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/31755#page/12/mode/1up? --Toxoplasma II. (talk) 17:40, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunatelly I don't find to whom respond, there is no user:Toxoplasma II. The reference is correct, see page 316 of Template:Barker et al., 2013 where the author and reference are clearly cited. Now, I did not read the whole book to find the exactly page where Teretistridae is cited. --Hector Bottai (talk) 23:22, 19 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Tony 1212 edit

Why did you revert the edits on the Pump. Seems OK and well meaning, was it the mention of Govaerts? Regards Andyboorman (talk) 14:01, 12 February 2019 (UTC)Reply

Eponym category template edit

of Jean Stanislaus Stolzmann&oldid=5423978 FYI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:58, 15 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Pigsonthewing: Oh, I see! Thanks!--Hector Bottai (talk) 01:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Question edit

Hi, Hectr! Seems that you are from Brazil, can you help me with a question? Have you ever seen anybody in Brazil that have freckles? I'm not 100 percent sure you see. I'm a photographer. --Auri1234 (talk) 12:58, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello Auri1234, are you referring to the spots on people's faces? Yes, not that much, but especially on European descendent and people with red hair.--Hector Bottai (talk) 13:14, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Oh, thank you! --Auri1234 (talk) 02:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

please block edit

please block this ip for an extended period of time, they are a persistent xwiki vandal. Praxidicae (talk) 15:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Numenius phaeopus edit

Nicely done with spotting the error "Scolpax" in the protonym! A bit worrying that it was there un-noticed for nearly 8 years . . . kicking myself for missing it! MPF (talk) 00:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

No worries MPF! This is a truly colective and voluntary work. Cheers--Hector Bottai (talk) 02:50, 29 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Malacoptila striata edit

Dear Hector, Hi Friend! The lesser crescent-chested puffbird/Buco chico (Malacoptila minor) is considered as an apart species by the IUCN, but a subspecies accordning the IOC World Bird List it's still a subspecies. It is a Brazilan species, therefore I should like to ask you wether the historic illustration (under the taxobox) in the Spanish wiki-article is perhaps the subspecies minor? Thanks for your reply. Friendly greeting, Henrik de Nie, — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hwdenie (talkcontribs) 10:28, 9 February 2020.

Hello Henrik @Hwdenie:, not likely. The illustration is 1882 and minor was described 1911. Plumagem is quite the same. Cheers. I Will be birding in Maranhão in November, will try a picture.--Hector Bottai (talk) 11:40, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
..Thanks for your quick reply. A picture will be nice! Succes, Henrik, --Hwdenie (talk) 15:41, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
Very nice and sharp pictures you made! Thanks. --Hwdenie (talk) 11:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply
You welcome! Hector Bottai (talk) 11:04, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Reference edit

Hi Hector - there's something wrong with the reference template at Phoenicopterus chilensis; I don't know how to repair it without risking messing it up. The main problem is that it includes two page number citations (242, 344), but clicking on either just leads to the cover page of the book, not the correct page. Additionally it calls the reference ⧼BHL⧽, but it's actually at the Biblioteca Digital of the Real Jardín Botánico, Madrid. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 00:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

@MPF: Hummm, what a mess. You are right. Will see later. Many articles involved.--Hector Bottai (talk) 00:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Obrigado! - MPF (talk) 00:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
@MPF: I found the root cause. The problem is that BHL is redirecting to Biblioteca Digital, meaning the book tittle is at BHL but when you click, it goes to Biblioteca Digital. Probably this redirection is unable to find the correct page, only to the Main page. For sure this happened after the template was created. Now I need to work out a solution...:-( Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 01:00, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Ouch!! Good luck! - MPF (talk) 01:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
@MPF: Template fixed, indexed directly to the page at Internet Archive. Now I have to manually fix each article using the template. See Phoenicopterus chilensis. Thanks for the advise.--Hector Bottai (talk) 03:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
@MPF: 100% fixed--Hector Bottai (talk) 12:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Excellent, thanks! A few other changes I'd like to suggest to improve the appearance (e.g., so the two page links are not separated by "Reference page", and avoiding language-specific wording); would it be possible to adapt the whole reference so it appears like this on the taxon page?
Thanks again! - MPF (talk) 18:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
@MPF: Done! Look at some of the utilizations.--Hector Bottai (talk) 18:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Many thanks! I've just made a few changes in the Phoenicopterus chilensis page (not the template), let me know if you think they're OK - MPF (talk) 23:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Edit reversion on the Administrators' Noticeboard edit

Hello Hector. I saw that you reverted one of my edits on the Administrators' Noticeboard, as shown here. I wonder if there was any particular reason for that, or if it simply was an honest mistake on your behalf? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:58, 13 March 2020 (UTC).Reply

Hi @Tommy Kronkvist: A non perceived click somewhere...thousand apologies. --Hector Bottai (talk) 11:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
Okay, so no problem then. Case closed, and apology accepted. :-) Also, @Koavf corrected it in mere minutes. However I wanted to double-check with you, in case there really was an issue that we had missed. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:42, 13 March 2020 (UTC).Reply

Template:Cat Boddaert etc as solo project edit

Seems that not worth of Village Pump topic. I see that in 2015 you created seven templates:

To be deleted, because same as deprecated {{Author}} and {{Author2}}. Objections?--Estopedist1 (talk) 05:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Not at all! I created those and soon regreted. At that time I didn't know even the existence of Hot Cat. I am replacing them every time I work in a page using. By the way, I didn't know about those {{Author}} templates. Do you think they are really necessary? Thanks.--Hector Bottai (talk) 10:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
Of course they have to be replaced before deletion.--Hector Bottai (talk) 10:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
no problem. I fix the situation. Don't waste your valuable time!--Estopedist1 (talk) 11:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
  Done These seven templates are extinct--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Linnaeus, 1758 edit

Hi Hector, see {{Linnaeus, 1758}}, can you eplain to me what is the order what we have to follow when adding another name in this template? I'm currently unable to understand how they are sorted, hence I added the last one at the end of the list. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Publication date vs Title page date edit

Hi Hector,

I've noticed your good work on wikispecies.

I often edit the taxonomy sections of bird articles on English wikipedia and when I've managed to track down a tricky to find scan I think it would be useful if I added an entry on wikispecies. Although in most cases I can just copy your examples I find it tricky knowing how to handle the date of publication. As you know well, the publication date on the title page of a volume isn't always the actual date of publication. Should I list the reference under the title page date and then add a note? Should I include a reference to a publication that discusses the publication date? Could you point me to some examples of how this should be handled.

As an example, this morning I updated the page on the fork-tailed flycatcher (Tyrannus savana). Before my update the page listed the authority as Vieillot, 1808 (and wikispecies still does). But the authority is now believed to be Daudin, 1802 - according to the IOC and H&M4 2014 Vol 2 p. 51. Zoonomen is usually very useful but in this case the reference was incorrect.

What made this particular reference confusing is that the protonym is listed in a volume with the title "Quadrupedes". I found the correct reference under "savana" in Sherborn 1930. (the reference is in volume 14 of "Quadrupedes" rather than in volume 14 of "Oiseaux") Here is my wikipedia reference (produced using cite book). Rather lengthy but I wanted to avoid any ambiguity - Buffon publications can be confusing:

Lacépède, Bernard Germain de; Daudin, François Marie (1799). "Tableau des sous-classes, divisions, sous-divisions, ordres et genres des oiseaux, par le Cen Lacépède; avec l'indication de toutes les espèces décrites par Buffon, et leur distribution dans chacun des genres, par F. M. Daudin". In Buffon, Georges-Louis Leclerc de (ed.). Histoire Naturelle par Buffon Dédiée au citoyen Lacépède, membre de l'Institut National (in French). Volume 14: Quadrupedes. Paris: P. Didot l'ainé et Firmin Didot. pp. 197-346 [227].

(I put the actual page number in square brackets - I didn't invent this notation but I admit it isn't that common)

The publication date is discussed here:

Richmond, Charles W. (1899). "On the date of Lacépède's 'Tableaux'". Auk. 16: 325–329.

Cheers - Aa77zz (talk) 16:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Caracara plancus edit

Hallo Hector, You rightly joined the two subspecies together. I made a wikispecies article for the southern caracara Caracara plancus plancus which in fact is the one most interwiki's still refer to. But this insight is not visible in the wikidata structure, wherin this taxon is split up in two species. I don't know how to fix this. Within the Dutch wikipedia there is some discussion, but no one knows how to repair this. (User Brya argues there have to be made 5 wikidata-items). Do you have any clue? Thanks in advance, Henrik de Nie--Hwdenie (talk) 09:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Inti Tanager edit

Hello, I have created Template:Lane et al., 2021 (and, somewhat reluctantly, changed the names of The Auk and The Condor), but don't have access to the article itself. Searching, I found this, seemingly by one of the authors, with the Latin name(s). It's all yours, if you would like to take it from here, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:23, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks @Maculosae tegmine lyncis:! We have the minimum details to create the pages. Is there anyone with access to get type locality, holotype data..etc?--Hector Bottai (talk) 00:13, 1 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

How we will see unregistered users edit


You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920a edit

Hello, Why you delete this template:Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920a, I made all templates for 1920 in in page order, and dates? Burmeister (talk) 02:16, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, it was duplicated by Miranda-Ribeiro, 1920i and because 1920a was not used except at author page, I merged all info at 1920i. Cheers. Hector Bottai (talk) 02:24, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
At least make a fusion of historic and preserve the page order in author page. Regards, Burmeister (talk) 02:25, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
You are right. To be honest I don't know how to fusion the historics. Apologize. Hector Bottai (talk) 02:34, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
I will do the necessary changes. Obrigado, Burmeister (talk) 02:45, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Done!. Your version of the page has been kept. Obrigado pela compreensão. Burmeister (talk) 02:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hola, desde WMCO nos gustaría saber más acerca de Wikiespecies edit

Hola @Hector Bottai, mucho gusto, soy Mónica Bonilla y dirijo a Wikimedia Colombia.

Te escribo porque estamos muy interesados desde el equipo de Wikimedia Colombia en conocer más sobre el funcionamiento y formas de contribuir con este proyecto.

Entonces, queríamos invitarte a una charla/taller para que nos compartas de tu experiencia y conocimientos del proyecto. ¿Cómo te parece la idea? Si estás de acuerdo podemos hablar vía correo electrónico, te dejo mi correo y podríamos seguir hablando por ese medio de@wikimediacolombia.org. Muchas gracias por tu atención y esperamos poder contar contigo. Mónica Bonilla (talk) Monica Bonilla (WMCO) (talk) 21:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Vernacular name edit

Hello, why did you delete my contributions? Can I only put one vernacular name per language? I found species like Panthera onca, which has various vernacular names by language. I increased some names in several species because according to the region they have variants, despite being the same language. Silves3.peru (talk) 05:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it was a decision on the Village Pump times ago, only one vn per language. Can you imagine each country of Latin America adding a name for Benteveo? It would be a mess. Sorry. Maybe some previous pages still have more than one. Hope you understand and respect. Greetings. Hector Bottai (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Journal für Ornithologie edit

Hi! I don't know if you remember the Village Pump discussion from 2021 at Wikispecies:Village Pump/Archive 56#Journal für Ornithologie after 1922, nor if you've worked around your problem yourself in the meantime, but I've just learned that some more volumes are open access online from Zobodat, which goes up to volume 92 (1944) and provides access in the form of PDF downloads for the articles: [1]. Monster Iestyn (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Very good to know!. Hector Bottai (talk) 18:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Trogon chrysochloros edit

Hi Hector, Maybe you know why I am not able to place your picture of Trogon chrysochloros in the nl-wiki? Maybe the name too long or ar ther special rights or so? Hwdenie (talk) 13:55, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's a small sysntaxisproblem. Now fixed!--Hwdenie (talk) 14:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Ok I tried to solve and it is done, I don't know if we did at the same time...:-) greetings Hector Bottai (talk) 14:33, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Maybe I was first. In any case, thanks for your help. Hwdenie (talk) 14:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

IOC 14.2 edit

Hi Hector - I saw you'd removed Carduelis carduelis caniceps from Carduelis carduelis, citing IOC 14.2 - this sounds reasonable, but is surely premature, since IOC 14.2 does not come into force until the start of July 2024? There are two IOC updates per year, at the start of each year (IOC X.1) and half way through each year (IOC X.2). They may have announced their intention to consider this split, but it isn't validated yet! Thanks - MPF (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi! You are right, IOC 14.2 is still draft. It happens that took more than a month to fully edit 14.1, so I am trying to anticipate some. Additionally, I never saw a draft taxonomic move going back. But, ok, let it happen first. Thanks! Hector Bottai (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! I have to admit it is a split I have been expecting for some time, so I think no harm in adding it 3 months early :-) MPF (talk) 23:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply