User talk:Keith Edkins/archive1

Add topic
Active discussions

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!

Lycaon 10:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


You were right about Aeshnoidea, thanx. - Lycaon 22:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Use of  Edit

Please use   when adding taxonavigation. An Excel-file that facilitates input of multiple taxa can be found here:

Lycaon 10:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)


It's great to have more folks working on birds. Nice job. Open2universe 20:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Disputed taxaEdit

I like the template. Wikispecies is still new and it will help answer questions people have. I agree that the category may get unwieldy but I am not sure at what level to break it out. Maybe by reason for dispute?

This is probably fine for species that are more or less well established. There are however taxa where the whole systematics is in a flux, which would yield numerous disputed entries. It is not always easy to judge proper taxonomy as the publications that concern them are sometimes difficult to get hold of. Many peer reviewed journals do not readily distribute there articles as PDF's on the net. - Lycaon 23:22, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


... for all the work your are doing. — Lycaon 16:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

move blockEdit

Hi Keith, I've blocked your user page from moves to prevent further vandalism. The most active editors seem to be most vulnerable. You can still edit it though. If you want it unblocked, just ask an admin. — Lycaon 15:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


Hi Keith,How do you manage to upload pages so fast? Do you prepare them in advance? Do you use some kind of macro? I'm asking because I've got about 7200 amphipods on an excel sheet, waiting to be entered into Wikispecies. -- Lycaon 07:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reponse. My VBA is rather ok. I'ld be happy to see your excel file for tips and/or hacking. As you probably know, I've posted an excel file for entering and formatting taxa on a while ago. -- Lycaon 08:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. Lycaon 22:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I have been using the spreadsheet you uploaded for Lycaon. It's pretty spiffy. Thanks, Open2universe 01:52, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


Hi Keith. Something went wrong with Scytalopus. All species are missing a ":". Do you do a rerun or do you want me to give you a hand fixing? BTW, I haven't had time to tamper with your macro yet, too busy at work... -- Lycaon 19:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Try Ucucha and his bot for adding the colons. He 's been doing similar things for me in the past. And as for next, maybe Nematoda... :-) -- Lycaon 20:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

obsolete taxaEdit

Hi Keith,

Could you place the {{delete}} template on obsolete taxa or taxa with wrong taxonavigation that you encounter? e.g. Ajaia.

Thanx, Lycaon 12:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe should take a look at the Orphaned pages? Those have no links arriving at them. I now and then clean out this list, sometimes deleting, sometimes adjusting taxonavigation, sometimes even completely rewriting. There are quite a few birds in there at the moment (two months ago there were only the Banksias).
Lycaon 15:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)



I've just see that you have started to work on the Odonata, but for some families, you go to fast to the genus level. For exemple, the family Libellulidae is divided into subfamilies, the Brachydiplacinae, Leucorrhiniinae, Libellulinae, Sympetrinae, Trameinae, and possibly somemore (my books are only for the Northeastern odonates of North America). Same for the Aeshnidae that have divided into subfamilies, and at least two of this subfamilies are divided also into tribes.

I don't know if they are any good webside about Odonata taxonomy that couls help you...

Trépas 18:05, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, that's correct like that. My more recent book doesn’t talk about the uncertain division of the subfamilies, but this book is from 1998. Possibly that it's something more recent. Anyway, I'm working on the Trichoptera right now, and I'll take a look on the Odonata after that for see if I can add the subfamilies or if it's better to wait until this taxon will be better defined.
Trépas 16:07, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


Keith, there is a problem with your italics. Lycaon 15:04, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Extinct groupsEdit

Hi Keith,

Wouldn't it be better to just put a dagger at the highest extinction level instead of taking it along to all underlaying taxa? E.g. Locustopsoidea is extinct, so logically al lower ranked taxa under Locustopsoidea would automatically be extinct too and may not necessarily need the †-symbol. — Lycaon 12:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)


Could you please consider nominating yourself for adminship? You are a very good contributor, with thousands of edits. I think you have enough experience now to be an admin. Furthermore, we need some more admins. Benedikt and Geni are pretty inactive now, as are UtherSRG and I (on Wikispecies) (I like it better to write on Wikipedia, in fact). Lycaon is still very active, but if he isn't there vandals can't be stopped. So please, please become an admin! Ucucha (talk) 15:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Reply to your questionsEdit

1. Gender of Eudynamys. Thanks for the link. I think I am wrong. I am trying to go through the Sibley-Monroe check list and make sure that every entry there points to "something" here. Most references still treat it as feminine (HBW, ITIS being two). I will revert the changes and create redirects. I have found that the Cuculidae is in a state of flux and there may need to be a few more adjustments.

2. Inserts by Moverton. I think you should ask them to stop adding family groups without the higher taxa. Especially if they are not in current use.

If you want to reply, you can reply here if you want to keep the thread. Thanks, Open2universe 00:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)


You're an admin now. Ucucha (talk) 16:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey Keith, don't drive faster than me :D :D ahahahaaa --Alperen 10:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Keith, I'm using plants database as reference. I promise, I will change them all if there's a serious conflict. I'm now trying to understand the difference (Alperen) -- 13:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

What is the possible reason for that conflict? --Alperen 13:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

So, can you suggest me a clear correction please? --Alperen 15:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I think I solved it. I will correct them all. Thanks, please don't hesitate to warn me for such issues. --Alperen 15:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


I'm following the third edition (just published) of Mammal Species of the World (ed.: D.E. Wilson & D.M. Reeder). That's actually the most authoritative work on mammals of the world. What's the classification on which you base yourself? You recognize Menzies' (1996) new Melomys-like genera, but not Nilopegamys (which was revalidated in 1995)... Ucucha (talk) 17:23, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Help on wikispeciesEdit

hello, just a quesiotn : DO we can use and copy the article from wikipedia to wikispecies without any kind of problem thanks jonathaneo

Recalcitrant userEdit

Hi Keith,

Please advice on how to handle Moverton. He keeps on adding taxa without taxonavigation, even if de higher systematics is already filled in. Often, however, he creates orphaned pages with wrong(?) taxonomy (e.g. Dasypeltinae. And then I'm not mentioning his rather rude behaviour on his discussion page. As an involved party I ask you to warn him (no blocking necessary as yet). Thnx . Lycaon 16:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)


Keith thank you very much for your work on Bryopsida :) --Alperen 14:29, 15 March 2006 (UTC)


Hi Keith, just a question, do you use EMBL or ITIS as a reference for the reptiles, or maybe another source? On wiki:en they are used together sometimes, a bit confusing. Thanx, Bart B kimmel 18:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

ITIS says Anomalepididae and EMBL says Anomalepidae... ITIS says Pythonidae (family) and EMBL Pythoninae (subfamily). I don't know what's best? -B kimmel 20:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Using templates for species listingEdit

I see you are using a template for listing species. It certainly looks cleaner. On wikipedia they often caution about using templates because of server load and advocate using the subst command if the template is not likley to change. Of course then you would loose the neat look that you get from the template. I am wondering if you have noticed any performance issues with your pages? Open2universe 12:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


can you give me a hand? He's at it again -- Lycaon 21:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

New templates for subgenera and subspeciesEdit

I have created templates to write the subgenus and the subspecies :
sgsp for Subgenus + species : { { sgsp|A|bax|A|bax|carinatus } } -> A. (A.) carinatus
ssp for species + subspecies : { { ssp|P|anthera|l|eo|leo } } See Panthera leo
sgssp for subgenus + species + subspecies : { { sgssp|A|bax|A|bax|c|arinatus|carinatus } } -> A. (A.) c. carinatus
I hope it will be useful.
Thorgal 23:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

About vernacular namesEdit

Can you please tell me why the "Vernacular Names" are only links to Wikipedia pages, and not the real common names of plants and animals ? Thanks. Thorgal 20:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


Can you tell me the exact term for the tribus, singular and plural, please ? Thanks. (Tribes, Tribi, Tribus ???)


Thanks for correcting my mistake. I did pretty well in biology - but that was back in the 10th grade. Could you show me where that information should have gone? It seems relevant to this project somehow. I'm (obviously) not a biologist. My interest here is photography, and I'd be happy to shoot living things for illustration purposes (I use a Canon). I enjoy visiting zoos and gardens, so I have access to some pretty cool non-local life forms. To help out here, though, I'll need to get the hang of navigating this site. Any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Rklawton 15:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


Can you help me start up on this site? I'm new.Tec 20:52, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

ssp templatesEdit

Thank you for your action. I had already changed the templates sgsp to sbgsp and sbgsplast (for genus + subgenus + species) according to sp and splast. Thorgal 07:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Italics standardEdit

Thanks for the clarification. I hope I didn't do too much damage. I will repair as I go. I have a ton of Cerambycidae to fill in down to the species and in some cases subspecies level. Any constructive criticism is appreciated.

Thanks again for the help/suggestions...I have already learned a lot since the dynastes stuff. Darren Brown 20:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)


I've seen the page on d'Orbigny, and there is a little problem. For the categories, the following name is only for the alphabetic order. It doesn't must to contain accents, ponctuations or hyphens. For d'orbigny, you must write [[Category:Taxon Authorities|Dorbigny Charles]], and not d'Orbigny, Charles. For the composed names, they are attached (example : for Milne-Edwards, I write Milneedwards ; for Dalla Torre, I write Dallatorre...). The european letters are transformed (example : Forsskål gives Forsskal, Péron gives Peron...). Thanks. (Excuse me for the mistakes, I'm not english) Thorgal 11:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Lindea (Tineidae)Edit

You have marked this genus as homonym. It's a junior synonym of Setomorpha. Then it's not usefull to keep it in your list. Thanks. Thorgal 08:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Th source is : [1] (The Global Lepidoptera Names Index) Thorgal 14:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

New homonymEdit

I have found a new homonym : the phylum Acanthocephala and the genus Acanthocephala Heteroptera - Coreidae. Thorgal 16:20, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

To import picturesEdit

When you'll have time, can you explain to me how I can import pictures in the "Commons" to edit them in the pages ? Thanks. Thorgal 14:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

New homonymEdit

There is a new homonym of Hamadryas, a genus described by Hübner in 1806 in the family Cosmopterigidae. It is not the same that Hamadryas Boisduval, 1832, classified in the Nymphalidae. I have named it Hamadryas (Cosmopterigidae). Furthermore, Hamadryas is the common name of Papio hamadryas, a monkey. Thorgal 13:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you for the precisions. I have changed my list. Thorgal 05:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


It seems to be a new homonym : Acanthophlebia Clarke, 1986 (Lepidoptera : Cosmopterigidae) and Acanthophlebia Towns, 1983 (Ephemeroptera : Leptophlebiidae), but I have no details. Thorgal 08:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


Yes, you're right about the Asaphiscidae. I didn't copied the good genus list. The problem is now resolved. Trépas 23:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Logo discussionEdit

Hi! I just wanted to draw your attention to a change to the logo I proposed at the village pump, since you seem to be one of the active administrators on this project. Looking forward to hearing your opinion on this! —Nightstallion (?) 13:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Reptile AuthoritiesEdit

I am creating an article for the families of Lacertilia on Wikipedia, and was having problems finding the authorities. I came here, and thought I struck gold, but found that the authorities I already had contradicted the ones you have added here. E.g. I have Oppel, 1811 for Anguidae and you have Gray, 1825. None have been the same for the 4 or 5 I have checked. I finally decided you must have been wrong with Xenosauridae, when you wrote Cope, 1900. He was dead three years earlier... Anyway, I was wondering your source, and how this has occured as it seems like you have mixed a lot of them up. Could you reply on my Wikipedia talk page please (en:User talk:LiquidGhoul). Thankyou. --liquidGhoul

Fluviphylacinae and ProcatopodinaeEdit

Hi, Keith, I see the Poeciliidae page, to link with the Commons categories for Poecilids, and the subfamilies don't coincide with ITIS and fishbase: there, three sufbamilies: Poeciliinae, Aplocheilichthyinae and Procatopodinae.

I have seen in the record that you have introduced the subfamily Fluviphylacinae to Fluviphylax, and Procatopodinae integred in Aplocheilichthyinae... ¿Why? The only reference that I have is ITIS and fishbase. Please, respond me in te discussion page in Poeciliidae (by this way, all the users will be able inform).

Thank you! Greetings, --Pristigaster 23:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Chlorophyta and T. Cavalier-SmithEdit

Is it true that T. Cavalier-Smith is the authority for 'Chlorophyta?' I thought the name was much older. Can you give me a reference for this, as I tried looking through various bibliographies of his and could not find this. Thanks. KP botany 20:23, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


Please see Wikispecies:Featured articles/Panthera tigris, Kempm's latest post. Cheers. Specify 16:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


Welcome back, it's been long. Lycaon 22:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Also check out our new help system! Lycaon 22:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, the transformation into the new format is far from complete. Everything should be separated by <br> and above genus level that will be in the template. See Panthera tigris as an example. Lycaon 22:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Classification is never providedEdit

It is a desperate call that I make here. Wikispecies is doing wrong, many french admin think so, and I can't let it happen without reacting. I already posted something here, without success.
Wikispecies has for purpose to provide the classification of taxons, right?
But each taxon has a different content and parents depending on the classification. And there are a lot of classifications for each taxons.:

  • Here is a small list of those classifications.
  • Here is an perfect sample that shows that a taxon name doesn't mean much if you don't provide the classification name.
  • commons:Category:Liliopsida Here is a sample that commons now provides the classification. And of course, there are classical classification and phylogenetic classifications.
  1. From what I understand in reading your articles, wikispecies provides only one classification for each taxon (in wikifrance, we provide 1 classical and 1 phylogenetical classif per taxon)
  2. But you never provide the classification followed.

I think it is urgent that you provide the classification followed by each article in the article. You will discover that all your articles follow different classification.
Look at Liliopsida. It is a total shame. The classification is not provided. The reason is that nobody ever described it that way. Cheers Liné1 06:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Please rename meEdit

Hi, I have changed my username at my homewiki and want to do it here to. Please rename me to Calandrella. Here is confirmation. Thanks, Leo Johannes 08:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


My continued ability to contribute to Wikispecies depends crucially on being able to protect just one page, called 'New Zealand', which is a faunistic page with links to (unprotected) pages on New Zealand taxa. My "friend" Lycaon keeps unprotecting it! I believe that such faunistic pages are well within the spirit and ideology of Wikispecies, and perhaps a new category ought to be created to accommodate them. However, I need to protect my New Zealand page for the following reasons: (1) in line with the Wikispecies philosophy, I am contributing this information for free, and there are potential conflicts of interest with other people/institutions here in N.Z. who are trying to extract as much funding as possible for similar projects; (2) if the page is open edit, it could very easily deteriorate into chaos, as what is needed is a single consistent view on the fauna. The classification isn't totally "objective", so other people may try to impose their own conflicting opinions and the result could be chaotic. Can the beauracrats please have a vote on this? Regrettably, if I cannot protect this one single page, I will have to leave Wikispecies...
Stephen Thorpe
Stho002 21:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC) PS: Other editors can still create their own versions of my 'New Zealand' page, expressing their own opinions, and they can give the pages disambiguated names, e.g. New Zealand, and link them to the appropriate taxa pages independently of me. Hence I am not trying to prevent alternative opinions, I am just trying to prevent alternative opinions from making my page into an unusable mess of conflicting opinions.
Stho002 22:42, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Oryzeae and GRINEdit

I need you help on how to search in to find tribes and subtribes.
I discovered on Oryzeae your interesting link on (which has the same result as
But I failed to use any search page to find the article on Oryzeae;-(
But how do you find this page and the related id ?
I have tried multiple GRIN search page like this search page
Thanks in advance for any answer.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 12:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

An important message about renaming usersEdit

Dear Keith Edkins,

I am cross-posting this message to many places to make sure everyone who is a Wikimedia Foundation project bureaucrat receives a copy. If you are a bureaucrat on more than one wiki, you will receive this message on each wiki where you are a bureaucrat.

As you may have seen, work to perform the Wikimedia cluster-wide single-user login finalisation (SUL finalisation) is taking place. This may potentially effect your work as a local bureaucrat, so please read this message carefully.

Why is this happening? As currently stated at the global rename policy, a global account is a name linked to a single user across all Wikimedia wikis, with local accounts unified into a global collection. Previously, the only way to rename a unified user was to individually rename every local account. This was an extremely difficult and time-consuming task, both for stewards and for the users who had to initiate discussions with local bureaucrats (who perform local renames to date) on every wiki with available bureaucrats. The process took a very long time, since it's difficult to coordinate crosswiki renames among the projects and bureaucrats involved in individual projects.

The SUL finalisation will be taking place in stages, and one of the first stages will be to turn off Special:RenameUser locally. This needs to be done as soon as possible, on advice and input from Stewards and engineers for the project, so that no more accounts that are unified globally are broken by a local rename to usurp the global account name. Once this is done, the process of global name unification can begin. The date that has been chosen to turn off local renaming and shift over to entirely global renaming is 15 September 2014, or three weeks time from now. In place of local renames is a new tool, hosted on Meta, that allows for global renames on all wikis where the name is not registered will be deployed.

Your help is greatly needed during this process and going forward in the future if, as a bureaucrat, renaming users is something that you do or have an interest in participating in. The Wikimedia Stewards have set up, and are in charge of, a new community usergroup on Meta in order to share knowledge and work together on renaming accounts globally, called Global renamers. Stewards are in the process of creating documentation to help global renamers to get used to and learn more about global accounts and tools and Meta in general as well as the application format. As transparency is a valuable thing in our movement, the Stewards would like to have at least a brief public application period. If you are an experienced renamer as a local bureaucrat, the process of becoming a part of this group could take as little as 24 hours to complete. You, as a bureaucrat, should be able to apply for the global renamer right on Meta by the requests for global permissions page on 1 September, a week from now.

In the meantime please update your local page where users request renames to reflect this move to global renaming, and if there is a rename request and the user has edited more than one wiki with the name, please send them to the request page for a global rename.

Stewards greatly appreciate the trust local communities have in you and want to make this transition as easy as possible so that the two groups can start working together to ensure everyone has a unique login identity across Wikimedia projects. Completing this project will allow for long-desired universal tools like a global watchlist, global notifications and many, many more features to make work easier.

If you have any questions, comments or concerns about the SUL finalisation, read over the Help:Unified login page on Meta and leave a note on the talk page there, or on the talk page for global renamers. You can also contact me on my talk page on meta if you would like. I'm working as a bridge between Wikimedia Foundation Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Stewards, and you to assure that SUL finalisation goes as smoothly as possible; this is a community-driven process and I encourage you to work with the Stewards for our communities.

Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) talk 18:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

The Fraser'sEdit

Hi Keith Edkins, please have a look in the great Fraser - family: Fraser. Thank you and best greetings. Orchi (talk) 16:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Keith Edkins/archive1".