Murma174

Archive

Archive

Murma174 (talk • contribs • block log • all projects)

Fields of activity 2015-2017

• Completion of taxon pages:

  Virus, down to Species level acc. ICTV 2016

  Virus, Baltimore classification down to Genus level acc. Viral Zone

  Archaea, down to Species level acc. NCBI

  Bacteria, down to Genus level acc. NCBI

  Protista, down to Genus level acc. several sources, WoRMS, AlgaeBase

  Fungi, higher level draft only acc. Ruggiero et al. / PLOS one 2015

• Patrolling
• Organising Species of the Month
• Ceasing contributions as of May 2017

---

Hi there! I'm Penny! Penny Rose Smith (talk) 16:00, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

@Penny Rose Smith: Hi Penny, I think, the Wikispecies:Village_Pump is a good page to start. There you can see, what we are working on here. --Murma174 (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll give it a good read. Penny Rose Smith (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Polyangium Link

Hello Murma, please do not move Polyangium Link to Polyangium (Link). 1. It is taxonomically not correct to be in parentheses, as Link is the author, not the first author of a combination. 2. Several other pages link to Polyangium Link!. Please undo your move. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Thiotrix: Hallo Thiotrix, ich habe die Verschiebung Deinem Wunsch entsprechend zurückgesetzt: Polyangium Link. Trotzdem bleibe ich überzeugt, dass dies nicht den Vereinbarungen auf Wikispecies entspricht. Das Genus heißt 'Polyangium' und nicht 'Polyangium Link'. Da es sich bei Polyangium um ein Homonym handelt, sollen Unterscheidungskriterien in Klammern gesetzt werden. Auch Wikidata nennt Polyangium als Bezeichnung für das Genus. Mir ist bewusst, dass die Bezeichnung 'Polyangium Link' in Fachkreisen akzeptiert wird, in Wikispecies halte ich sie für falsch. - Ich hielt dies für einen Lapsus, den ich zu korrigieren beabsichtigte. Da ich leider nicht mehr über die Geduld verfüge, immer wieder die gleichen Grundsatzdebatten auf Wikispecies zu führen, bin ich Deinem Wunsch nachgekommen und werde mich nicht weiter einmischen.

Besten Gruß und Dank für Deinen Einsatz! --Murma174 (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Abadiella

Why did you delete Abadiella? Haplodiploid75 (talk) 18:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Haplodiploid75: Abadiella was a test page or vandalism. The only content was "Hi". That's why I deleted the page. Murma174 (talk) 10:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@Haplodiploid75: Abadiella Hupé, 1952 was published with an inadequate description and is considered nomen nudum, hence unaccepted by the Interim Register of Marine and Nonmarine Genera^(link) and others.

For Hupé's original designation, see Contribution à l'étude du cambrien inférieur et du précambrien III de l'Anti-Atlas marocain. Notes et Mémoirs du Service géologique du Maroc 235: 480. Please also see information about Parabadiella.^{(Wikidata item, with links to taxon identifiers: Q3766344)}

–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC).

Ok, fair enough. I can always create a better one after having made the corresponding Wikipedia page Haplodiploid75 (talk) 01:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

┌───────┘ @Haplodiploid75: I also found this:

• Wang, M., Peng, S. & Zhang, X.-L. 2022. Taxonomic revision of the Cambrian trilobite Abadiella and its stratigraphic significance in Gondwana. ResearchGate

Unfortunately the paper is a preprint that hasn't yet been peer reviewed. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC).