MargaretRDonald

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:

• Help:Contents provides a good introduction to editing Wikispecies.
• Templates are there to help you following syntax and formatting rules.
• Have a look at Done and to do.

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 the 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! -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

A note about our preferred format

Hello, and again welcome to Wikispecies! Please note that Wikispecies is very different from Wikipedia and most of the other wikis, both in purpose and form. While Wikipedia is a generally kept "all you can eat" encyclopaedia Wikispecies is only a database for taxa, taxonomy, biological systematics, type repositories, and information about the authors and references needed to verify that data. We also try to keep the site as language independent as possible, since there is only one version of Wikispecies for all humanity, while Wikipedia is available in almost 300 different languages. Hence we generally try to keep taxon- and author pages as free of language specific "prose" as possible. This is also why I removed some of the information you had added to the Bryan Alwyn Barlow page – it's not that the stuff you added was incorrect as such, but that type of data is better suited for Wikipedia rather than Wikispecies.

As I guess you've seen I also removed the inline <ref>links</ref> and {{Reflist}} templates. The reason is that we don't use them or reference templates like {{Cite journal}} etc. here. All of the other wikis do, but we have special reasons not to. As you can see those code snippets and templates do work here anyway, but we only keep them around in order to maintain compatibility with stuff automatically imported from the other Wikimedia sister projects. They should not be actively used or manually added. Instead we have our very own type of reference templates. We create one (and only one) specific template for each reference, with it's own Wikispecies page – and then link/mimic that data to wherever it is needed. The reason is that the same references are often used in a whole bunch of pages. Hence using one specific template for that very reference is a lot easier than adding separate "cite journal" templates to 20 or more pages. If we need to update the data in the future—say, a PDF link is altered—then it's a lot more convenient to make all corrections only to the specific template's page, rather than on every single one of the perhaps 20+ pages a corresponding "cite journal" template would be used. You can read about our reference templates on the Reference section help page, more specifically in the Reference Templates section on that page.

Feel free to ask any question or make suggestions – me an all the other admins are often quite friendly and helpful. :-) Lastly I wish to thank you for the pictures you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons – we definitely need more images representing the many members of Santalales. I'm not very active on Commons myself, but took the liberty to add your Velleia paradoxa picture to the proper Commons category (the one that was rotated 90° about two weeks ago.) Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:01, 2 January 2018 (UTC).

Hello

Hi Margaret. Thanks for your edits and suggestions. Hopefully my edits with Lagunaria patersonia were useful. If I can be of any further use then please contact me. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 20:23, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Lagunaria patersonia

If the image on Lagunaria patersonia that was pulled from Wikidata is wrong, please fix it on Wikidata, not just here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:20, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Margaret. Are you aware of cultivars of this plant? In my limited experience I find nurseries selecting rather than naming. Your second image, with its pale pink, is more typical of the species that I know. However, we had a plant at Massey University, New Zealand with a much deeper colour, but no cultivar name. I reckon we have an example of a limited amount of natural variation in flower colour. Andyboorman (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy. The original photo was one of mine, and when I saw the tree, I unhesitatingly identified it as Lagunaria patersonia, but then, having doubts and not being able to verify by returning to the tree, I preferred to use an image from a plant of whose identity I was certain... (and thought that the tree I had seen in Adelaide might have been a cultivar.... But I suspect you are right: natural variation. MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

So nothing to fix then, just preference of typicality? Cheers. Andyboorman (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Whether the former image is one of a plant whose identity is uncertain, or merely of one that is less-typical, if it warrants a fix in Wikispecies, then it equally warrants a fix in Wikidata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

I made a change to image in the image file, removing it from the Category:Lagunaria patersonia and the Category:Lagunaria because of my uncertainty, but the code for the Image template (with no specific pointing to an image) still picked up this image(???) MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello MargaretRDonald, the template "Image" gets the photo from the entry in wikidata, like Andy Mabbett said above. If you want to display another picture, you can either use template "Image|name_of_other_picture"; or if you think the image is misidentified, please change the entry directly at the wikidata item (see left menu) to a correctly identified photo. --Thiotrix (talk) 09:02, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Author templates and links

Hi. In regards to this edit, please note that simply changing the brackets isn't enough. There are many, many authors with the same surname, for instance Bryan Alwyn Barlow and George W. Barlow. Hence simply writing {{a|Barlow}} or [[Barlow]] isn't sufficient. Such a link will not point to for example the "Bryan Alwyn Barlow" page, but to a Barlow disambiguation page, and in some cases it will be impossible to know whome of the listed "Barlows" is intended. I mean... for example have a look at the page listing authors named Wu, and you'll soon see why it may be problematic...  One thing that extends this problem is the fact that while author abbreviations used within botany are often unique for specific authors, in zoology they are not. Therefore, whether using author templates or common wiki links, please always specify the full author page as a piped link. I've already changed the {{a|Barcelona}} & {{a|Pelser}} links in the edit I mentioned above to {{a|Julie F. Barcelona|Barcelona}} & {{a|Pieter B. Pelser|Pelser}}, so no worries there.

Please see the actual author templates pages {{A}} and {{Aut}} if you need more information. Or of course ask me – I will most often answer within a few hours, at most. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:07, 15 January 2018 (UTC).

Another point. In botany we prefer the full abbreviated accepted scientific name in the Name section, due to the possibility of a range of publications and dates. This is usually found on IPNI as the earliest publication unless noted otherwise. In zoology the author is sufficient on it own. I have added this to the edit above, as an example. Hope this helps cheers — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andyboorman (talk • contribs) 08:50, 15 January 2018‎.

A. pallidifolia Tindale

Hi Margaret. This combination is accepted as Vachellia pallidifolia by every authority in Australia at least! See here on World Wide Wattle site and APC. It is a complex situation and not all redirected pages have been completed hence the redlinks. Now your addition to the Acacia taxon page just goes to Vachellia pallidifolia, as it should. Cheers. Andyboorman 21:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Andy Andyboorman (talk) . I realised that after I had made the changes, but wasn't sure about how Wikispecies handled it.... MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Usually we do not place synonyms on the main taxon page species/genus list, as a redirect will send a search to the correct page. Some editors have a separate synonym list, but for Acacia this would be way too large! Andyboorman (talk) 11:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Reference templates – a handy hint

Hi. When creating reference templates such as {{Hunter & Bruhl, 1996}} you can add the code string {{subst:reftemp}} immediately after the reference citation on the new template page, and it will automatically add a blank space, plus the "Find all Wikispecies pages which cite this reference" and "Reference page" links. It will also automatically add the reference template to Category:Reference templates. In other words, you only need to write the actual reference citation, and then the {{subst:reftemp}} code snippet will automatically take care of all the technicalities. This will help avoid adding incorrect links this one, which can sometimes be hard to spot, and will also make sure all the backlinks etc are formatted in the same way in all of our reference templates. As stated on the actual {{Reftemp}} template page it must be "subst'ed" as in the above examples. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy... I am hoping you might edit {{Hunter & Bruhl, 1996}} to show me just what you mean. Best regards, MargaretRDonald (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘ The final result of both the code and the rendered page will actually look the same so me editing the template wouldn't be of any real help to you. Instead I can show you some code examples here, however for the sake of legibility I leave out the wiki codes such {{a|John T. Hunter|Hunter, J.T.}} and [[Taxon name]] plus ISSN and PDF links, code for italics, etc. Though in reality you would of course need to add them, in the exact same way as you've already done in the template.

Here goes. I use the {{Hunter & Bruhl, 1996}} template as an example, however bear in mind that in reality that particular template is already mended. At the moment the citation looks like this (minus the links):

* Hunter, J.T. & Bruhl, J.J. 1996. Three new species of Phyllanthus (Euphorbiaceae: Phyllantheae) in South Australia. Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens 17: 127–136. PDF.

In order to automagically fix the backlinks and categories etc, you simply add the {{subst:reftemp}} code string at the end. As I mentioned above it should be added immediately after the reference citation, i.e. without a leading space since that will also be added automatically. Hence the code now would look like this:

* Hunter, J.T. & Bruhl, J.J. 1996. Three new species of Phyllanthus (Euphorbiaceae: Phyllantheae) in South Australia. Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens 17: 127–136. PDF.{{subst:reftemp}}

As you can see the {{subst:reftemp}} code string at the end is the only difference. When you save i.e. hit the "Publish changes" button the "Reftemp" template will automatically add all of the necessary codes and categories, so the final code will look like this:

* Hunter, J.T. & Bruhl, J.J. 1996. Three new species of Phyllanthus (Euphorbiaceae: Phyllantheae) in South Australia. Journal of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens 17: 127–136. PDF. <includeonly>[http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Hunter_%26_Bruhl,_1996 Reference page.]</includeonly> <noinclude>
** [http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:{{BASEPAGENAMEE}} Find all Wikispecies pages which cite this reference.][[Category:Reference templates]]</noinclude>

Note that all of these new code strings are only added after you hit the "Publish changes" button: you will not see the added codes if you only use the "Show preview" button. (That's why I wrote "editing the template wouldn't be of any real help" above, since you wouldn't really see my edits, only the subsequent edits automatically made by the template. And by the way using the preview prior to saving is a good habit anyway, in order to check the text formatting etc.)

To sum it up using the {{subst:reftemp}} template is a lot easier than to manually add all of that rather complex code. Among other things the template automatically changes the ampersand and spaces in "Hunter & Bruhl" to the necessary "Hunter_%26_Bruhl" code which can otherwise be easily missed or misspelled. The same goes for umlaut and other diacritical marks in names such as Müller ("M%C3%BCller"), Núñez ("N%C3%BA%C3%B1ez") etc. Plus of course it adds the links and categories.

I hope this helped. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to ask. Cheers, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy (I think I get it now) MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Coding experiments

Hello again! Tests like this one are often best made in the Wikispecies Sandbox rather than on actual template- or taxon pages. The sandbox works just like a regular Wikispecies page, except it was created specifically for experimenting with codes and layout. In simple terms the difference is that changes to the sandbox won't interfere with any other pages in the Wikispecies database, while changes to for example a template will immediately be reflected on all the pages were the template is used (which in some cases may be several hundred of our pages).

Please note that the above mentioned sandbox is fully "public". In other words any user can make any changes to it at any time they please (except of course for adding copyrighted, offensive, or defamatory content). Also, from time to time it will be reset by an admin in order to clear out old material. If you need a way around that you can create your own "private" sandbox as a subpage of your user page, like this: User:MargaretRDonald/Sandbox. After you've created the subpage you can add a wiki link to it on your user page (User:MargaretRDonald) for easy access, or simply bookmark it in your web browser. That way you can easily test all of your Wikispecies ideas without risk of making inadvertent changes to other pages, and in your own pace. Happy editing! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC).

Inline Wikipedia links

Please stop adding the {{Wikipedia}} template to pages, like you've done to for example the Acacia beadleana and Phyllanthus involutus pages. The template always links specifically to the English Wikipedia (enWP), and if there is an equivalent page at enWP it will be listed in the left hand menu anyway, under the "In Wikipedia" section. In both of the above examples (and others) there is no equivalent page yet created at enWP, so clicking "your" link will end up in nowhere, so to speak... The pages may of course be created in enWP in the future, but then our servers will add them to the left hand menu as mentioned above, which makes the inline Wikipedia links superfluous.

By the way the same is often true for the {{Commonscat}} template, which you also add from time to time. If clicking the "For more multimedia" Commonscat links on either of the above examples, one will end up on a page at Wikimedia Commons saying "This page does not currently exist". This is not productive. Otherwise: thanks a bunch for your contributions! Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy. I didn't realise. (I won't do this in future.) MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Is all this due to happen some time in the future? For example, I know there are many images in the Commons for Allocasuarina distyla, but I see no link to them. Equally, there is an article on Muellerina eucalyptoides in Wikipedia but there seemed to be no automatic link, which is why I added both the commonscat and wikipedia to the wikispecies article. MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

It is an ongoing labour. The automatic links feature (and very mush else around here, too) is the result of a two step process in which our sister-wiki Wikidata acts as a central hub serving all of the other wikis (Wikispecies, Wikipedia, Commons, WikiNews, and so forth). The first step is entering the data to the Wikidata database. This is most often done by automated software (we call them "bots") which fetch data from all (!) of the wikis and enters it to Wikidata. It may take some time for a specific change in Wikispecies to show up in the Wikidata database, since all put together there are literally tens of thousands of changes made to the different wikis every minute. This step can also be done manually and there are many of us wikimedians who manually add or check the information in Wikidata, both to speed things up, and for quality control. The Muellerina eucalyptoides page is an example of this: First you created the Wikispecies page in January 4th (see our revision history for the page), and the next day user Thiotrix added your contribution to the Wikidata database (see the Wikidata revision history). Prior to his edit the Wikipedia and Commons links would not be visible on the Wikispecies page, simply because Wikidata hadn't yet been told that such a page exists. By the way if you check the right hand side of the "main" Wikidata Muellerina eucalyptoides page you will see a list of all the different language versions of Wikipedia that have a page for that particular species, and below it "Other sites" at Wikimedia who carry it; in this case Wikispecies and Commons.

The second step is always fully automatic, and involves Wikidata sorting and serving us the data – this is what we see in the left hand menus. For an example head back to the Wikispecies' Muellerina eucalyptoides page and sure enough: in the left menu section called "In Wikipedia" you will see the same Wikipedia languages as listed on the Wikidata page, and in the section called "In other projects" you will see a link to the Commons category. The same is true for our Allocasuarina distyla page.

As for links to Commons that is (or at least can be) a different problem. There are a lot of pictures of species in Commons that aren't represented by a Commons category. Again using Muellerina eucalyptoides as an example, there are about a handful of images of it in Commons, and they are all sorted together in the Commons category named Category:Muellerina eucalyptoides. If we compare this to the sister taxon Muellerina celastroides we soon realise that while there may be images of it in Commons they are not easily shown to us, because as of yet a matching Commons category named Category:Muellerina celastroides hasn't been created. As the name suggests our template called {{Commonscat}} only refers to Commons categories – and if there's no category there to be found, we don't see any pictures. (In this particular case there are actually no pictures uploaded to Commons hence no real need for a category, but as I said orphaned pictures of species without matching Commons categories isn't at all unusual.)

Phew, that's it for now. It's 12:20 PM and time for lunch here in Sweden. :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:20, 24 January 2018 (UTC).

Plant Names

Hello Margaret. In the Name Section, for plants, the name plus author is not really sufficient. For example, Hygrophila R.Br. The name, plus author and year of publication is better, for example Hygrophila R.Br. (1810) and the best is the full scientific name, which will look like Hygrophila R.Br., Prodr. Fl. Nov. Holland. 479. (1810). I put the year of publication in parenthesis as apparently it is more accessible. There are many reasons for this, but as an example see Poa annua. In the Name Section it should be Poa annua L. Sp. Pl. 1: 68. 1753, also note the synonyms in date order. This is ideal as well. Hope this helps Andyboorman (talk) 20:21, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Thanks, Andy. I will do this from now on, and as I encounter my omissions, will fix them. MargaretRDonald (talk) 20:47, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

auto redirect script

Hello Margaret. I think you may like using this script for creating redirects in a list of synonyms. It is fairly straight forward to use and install, but needs a bit of a procedure. It is best installed on your main user page. I started by adding a handful of --- to give a line across the bottom of the page. Then you need to add [[User:yourusername/common.js]] which creates a redlink to a new page. Click on the redlink to create the page and just add to it importScript('User:Rillke/createRedirects.js') where the cursor is. It will create a page of script and save this new page and now you should have User:MargaretRDonald./common.js showing on your user page. It will now work with your edits. It will display Create Redirects in the Tools on the left of the page. You use the Synonym Wikispecies tool and make sure the synonyms are on different lines with a * or double ** and only the plant names are assumed to be italicised. For example, Poa humilis Lej., Fl. Spa 1: 49 (1811), nom. illeg. and Poa annua var. crispa Gray, Nat. Arr. Brit. Pl. 2: 105 (1822). No [[]] around the names please. Once you have created the list hit Preview and look to the left and hit Create Redirects tool. It is a two stage process, so once you are happy with the first stage then hit the create redirects. The new redirects will show in green and any existing redirects or taxon pages will show red. These you ought to note to sort out. The tool works with genera and species, but for names that are not usually in italics I italicise them then reverse this before saving. Give it a go with Nelsonia canescens, but get rid of the [[]]! Hope it works if not let me know and I will try to figure out where I went wrong. Andyboorman (talk) 17:31, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Thanks, Andy. A very long hmmm.... I'll give this a go when I am feeling a bit braver... Need to think on this. Cheers MargaretRDonald (talk) 17:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Just what I thought before I bit the bullet so to speak, but in the end it was actually easy. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 18:32, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Banksia and Dryandra

Hello Margaret. What is the current state of play in Australia, with the expansion of Banksia to include Dryandra? If it is more or less in favour of the expanded Banksia, then we can populate the redlink Banksia subg. Dryandra. Last time I looked a couple of years ago some folks were still having hissy-fits! Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Loranthaceae

Hello. I have added the tribes and some of the subtribes to the above family, using Nickrent and the Parasitic Plant Network. This was in response to your edits on Actinanthella. I think if you follow the use of templates and also how I constructed the tribes and subtribes this will hopefully aid and help your edits in the future. Good luck and if you need help let me know. Andyboorman (talk) 18:45, 27 February 2018 (UTC) Thanks, Andy MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:05, 27 February 2018 (UTC) ːI am struggling to get a template for such things as

Taxonavigation: Santalales
Classification System: APG IV Superregnum: Eukaryota Regnum: Plantae Cladus: Angiosperms Cladus: Eudicots Cladus: Core eudicots Ordo: Santalales

Familia: Loranthaceae
Tribus: Lorantheae
Subtribus: Dendrophthoinae
Genus: Trithecanthera
I can see that it has been done, but not how to do it. MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

You can now see the output above, but also look at through the edit history on the taxon page. This is what template Trithecanthera looks like once created

{{Dendrophthoinae}}
Genus: {{gbr|Trithecanthera}}

The gbr bit adds a line break and places the genus in parenthesis. Then we add template Dendrophthoinae as

{{Lorantheae}}
Subtribus: [[Dendrophthoinae]]<br>

Next is template Lorantheae as

{{Loranthaceae}}
Tribus: [[Lorantheae]]<br>

So we have a series of nested templates which will be used with the appropriate taxa. As you can see the actual taxon page (in red) for Dendrophthoinae has not been created yet. Does this help? Andyboorman (talk) 19:42, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy... I am starting to get the picture MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Andy... I successfully managed Helixanthera, & Tolypanthus, but have completely managed to stuff up Scurrulinae and its various subpages. I am hoping you will clean them up, and again have a go at explaining what I should do. Sorry to be such a nuisance... MargaretRDonald (talk) 23:03, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

---

I will give some explanations a try. Hopefully understandable. Now for Scurrulinae, here you used a template as the taxon (article) page and vice versa, which caused a deal of confusion. Look at edit, this {{Scurrulinae}} within the taxon page straight under the ==Taxonavigation== tool creates a template by its use of {{}}. These templates are used only to link to other pages and also add a line like Subtribus: Scurrulinae plus New Line, which is displayed on the taxon page. The link is made in this case by another template {{Lorantheae}} in other words the next taxon up the classification tree. Think of these templates simply as links in a chain. The big advantage of this process is that if you want to change the links on a genus, for example, you edit its template, for example see what I have done with Scurrula as it now has the tribe and subtribe added by just changing {{Loranthaceae}} to {{Scurrulinae}}. Have a go with Taxillus by finding "Templates used on this page:" at the bottom, expand it and find Template:Taxillus (edit) click on edit and follow the above. Lastly do no use ==Taxonavigation== in one of these templates, as it will add a superfluous Taxonavigation - see the edit history for Template:Helixanthera. Hope this helps and by the way I have made all these errors!!! Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 16:08, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy. Part of my problem is that I somehow cannot navigate to, e.g.,

Taxonavigation: Santalales
Classification System: APG IV Superregnum: Eukaryota Regnum: Plantae Cladus: Angiosperms Cladus: Eudicots Cladus: Core eudicots Ordo: Santalales

Familia: Loranthaceae
Tribus: Lorantheae
Subtribus: Scurrulinae
Genus: Taxillus
or

Taxonavigation: Santalales
Classification System: APG IV Superregnum: Eukaryota Regnum: Plantae Cladus: Angiosperms Cladus: Eudicots Cladus: Core eudicots Ordo: Santalales

Familia: Loranthaceae
Tribus: Lorantheae
Subtribus: Tapinanthinae
Genus: Plicosepalus
or

Taxonavigation: Santalales
Classification System: APG IV Superregnum: Eukaryota Regnum: Plantae Cladus: Angiosperms Cladus: Eudicots Cladus: Core eudicots Ordo: Santalales

Familia: Loranthaceae
Tribus: Lorantheae
Subtribus: Tapinanthinae
Genus: Agelanthus
to modify it. If it hasn't been created I get there, but if I make an error I can't correct it... MargaretRDonald (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks like you are missing how the get to the templates from inside the taxon pages. Firstly go to the taxon page itself e.g. Taxillus and click on it to get to the edit screen. Look at the bottom, you should see these three lines:

Wikidata entities used in this page
Templates used on this page:
This page is a member of 1 hidden category:

expanding the middle one will give this list:

Templates used on this page:

Template:A (edit)
Template:Angiospermae (edit)
Template:Aut (edit)
Template:Core eudicots (edit)
Template:Doi (edit)
Template:Eudicots (edit)
Template:Fbr (edit)
Template:GRIN (edit)
Template:IPNI (edit)
Template:Image (edit)
Template:Loranthaceae (edit)
Template:MBG (edit)
Template:Nowrap (edit)
Template:PWOb (edit)
Template:Plantae (edit) (semi-protected)
Template:Santalales (edit)
Template:Sp (edit) (semi-protected)
Template:Splast (edit)
Template:Taxillus (edit)
Template:Taxonav (edit) (semi-protected)
Template:Tieghem, 1895c (edit)

Clicking on the edit for Template:Taxillus gives this;

{{Loranthaceae}}
Genus: ''[[Taxillus]]'' <br/>
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

How get rid of Loranthaceae and replace with Scurrulinae remembering to keep the {{}} around it. Then Publish changes. I have reverted my edits so you can follow the above, but see the edit history. Changes will also appear automatically on the taxon page as well.

Hope this helps and is clearer! Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 09:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Andy. Very helpful, indeed. (I've been charging along. And now I can get to the ones I wasn't able to.. Fantastic MargaretRDonald (talk) 09:20, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay due to sleep break! Snow worries, sorry silly humour. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 09:26, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Not at all. I have been working all day using your first description of what to do and ignoring all the red... And I must say, I think it works extremely well with someone on the other side of the world. Thanks for all the help.MargaretRDonald (talk) 09:32, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

A piece of advice

Hi Margaret I have noticed that you have tried adding category code. Just remember that you need to add both lines as below.
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>

<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

Without both does odd things. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 19:15, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

I agree with Andy here (I most often do... :-) but there is something odd going on with those categories... In some cases the Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates is automatically added as a hidden category, even if the <includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly> code string is not present in the actual page code. As an example that happened here. In those (rare?) cases I guess it is inherited from some other (higher ranked) Taxonavigation template, but I don't know. In any case this never happens with its sibling Category:Taxonavigation templates and I guess there is never any harm in always adding them both. A page will not be listed twice in a category even if it is both auto-included and added "by hand", so there shouldn't be a problem. All the best, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:59, 5 March 2018 (UTC).

Hi Andy & Tommy. Any taxonavigaion edit that I made that has a single noinclude ... must have happened automatically. When I finally spotted the include/noinclude codes, I added both sets of code, but prior to that I added no codes to taxonavigation templates which involveed noinclude.... So I was a bit startled by the message about only adding one of the lines. Anyway, I'll try and go back and find all the taxonavigation templates which I made and fix them. Thanks again MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

I've subsequently added categories to some of "your" Taxonavigation templates, after you've created them. So not all of them were added automatically... :-) If you want to fix any of the templates lacking the proper categories, that would be great. To date you've created a total of 171 different Taxonavigation templates, and you can find a list of all of them here. Quite a lot of them already include the categories, and since the job only involves a copy-and-paste action of the same two lines it shouldn't take too long. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy. I think I have now fixed them all.MargaretRDonald (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Great work Margaret! You fixed all but {{Amylotheca}} which I sorted out a few seconds ago. Now lets leave this esoteric fiddling with databases behind us for a while, and continue on with the rather more fun taxonomy... :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC).

Totally agree! Andyboorman (talk) 07:59, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Picture galleries, plus orthography and placement of the "Vernacular names" section

Hi Margaret. I've deleted the image gallery you added to the Angophora hispida page. Please see our Image Guidelines and the What Wikispecies is not page for more information about that. I also took the liberty to rename the "Vernacular Name" section to the correct form "Vernacular names". Note that the word "names" should be all lower case, and always in plural – even if only one vernacular name is added to the list. By the way the same goes for the "References", "Primary references", "Additional references" and "Links" headlines: they should always be in plural, and only the very first letter should be upper case.

Lastly I moved the Vernacular names ("VN") section to the very bottom of the page: please see the Help:Vernacular names section for details about spelling and placement of the VN section.
–Cheers, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:43, 14 March 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy. (Clearly I have a bit of re-editing to do) But what is appropriate when one might wish to show the tree, the inflorescence and the fruit, particularly if they show something which is diagnostic for the genus/species? MargaretRDonald (talk) 23:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Most often we should alway stick to only one picture per page, or perhaps two if a species shows significant sexual dimorphism. It is important to remember that Wikispecies is primarily a database for taxa, taxonomy, biological systematics plus nomenclature and type repositories, and in a wider meaning also information about the authors and references needed to verify all that data. However it is not (at least not yet) a service meant to help determine the species of any given individual specimen. Instead such information should be gathered from the citations and publications we refer to on every taxon page. In most cases that should be sufficient, particularly if we also add a {{Commons category}} or {{Commons}} template (as on the Angophora hispida page) which presents not only a small image gallery, but a link to a Commons page where all relevant Wikimedia pictures are listed. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC).

Thanks, Tommy. Very helpful.MargaretRDonald (talk) 01:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)