User talk:Orchi/archive

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 to follow our syntax and formatting standards.
• 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 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! Ucucha 05:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Author pages

It is not necessary to include a section header for the name of the author. However, it is usually a good idea to include the standard author abbreviation. See Hélène Bischler for an example (although this one lacks the birth date information). --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:24, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

I think that requires a bureaucrat ... try User:OhanaUnited ... Stho002 (talk) 22:16, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

template:WCL

I just wonder why you have changed the template??? I have followed the recommendations from the World Checklist How to cite us. 12:44, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

...I did'nt know the "cite:How to cite us". I wanted the same optic like the link to MBG and IPNI. Excuse me! By the way. Do you have connections to KEW? Unfortunately the link of this template is out of function for nothospecies (×). Until today the specialists in WP-software did'nt find a way to remove this sign in the url to KEW. Do you see a way? Greetings. Orchi (talk) 14:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I can contact Dr. Govaerts and see what can be arranged. Uleli (talk) 03:29, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

That's a very good way. Orchi (talk) 16:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Just a suggestion

Since you are a botanist, might I suggest that you might like to contribute to getting all Phytotaxa articles on to Wikispecies, eg. ISSN_1179-3155/2012. If you feel so inclined, the easiest thing to do is to go through the list here copying and pasting all the article titles into each article template (i.e. click on 'reference page' for each article on ISSN_1179-3155/2012, click on edit, and paste the title). Then, you or I can go through them and add the authors last ... Stho002 (talk) 22:36, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your honorable offer, but in the moment, I'm afraid, my time allows not a good work in this extensive project. Best regards. Orchi (talk) 14:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Citation

Maybe a small thing, but can we agree on a citation form? You use: Calochortus elegans var. major Hook., Fl. Bor.-Amer. 2: 183 (1838).. maybe copying from WCSP? I was told tu use the form from the Botanical Code which would give: Hook., Fl. Bor.-Amer. 2: 183. 1838. I can follow your way, but nicer if we use the same. Uleli (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

....I thought, KEW would know the correct way and the Botanical Code. ;). Please give me time to reflect. Orchi (talk) 21:58, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Kew is not one system, but many. Just check IPNI which has used several ways used during the past. Please do reflect and let me know your view Uleli (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

.....to tell the truth: My personal preference in botanical annual details is the form with (brackets).

Why:

Many institutes, books (e.g. the newest: Genera Orchidacearum) use the form with brackets.

In "International Code of Botanical Nomenclature" the year is mostly (?) with brackets e.g. Linum radiola L. (1753).

There is no mistake in numbers with great works (e.g. Curtis's Bot. Magazine).

And there is a clear difference to the nomination of years in the zoological form (Of course that is not a scientifical reason).

By the way I think we can use both forms. Likewise to the personal preference in commons of the big, (for me: ugly) Wikispecies button. :-)

Greetungs. Orchi (talk) 19:23, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Question to you: Is it correct to speak of "Nothospecies" in the case of "species" of Nothogenera or exists another term? As here: × Calassodia tutelata

ICBN has brackets in short references Linum radiola L. (1753) and without when the publication is fully cited Ficus tiliifolia Baker, J., Linn. Soc., Bot. 21: 443. 1885. The Plant List, GRIN, Euro+Med Plantbase does not use brackets so there is probably no way of telling which way is a head of the other. I would just prefer uniformity for Wikispecies. I certainly does not understand the form used by some here, to put the year first in a "reference formula": Ficus tiliifolia Baker, 1885. J., Linn. Soc., Bot. 21: 443. This is a very unusual way and just lead to a vast number of unnecessary typing and waste of time in my mind. I can ajust to use your form with brackets, even if many my best sources does not use them.

and yes, they are nothospecies. Uleli (talk) 00:54, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Vernacular names

Do you know how to fix template:VN.... it cut the names. See Clethra barbinervis. Uleli (talk) 00:58, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

...I do'nt find an error. Please help me.Orchi (talk) 18:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Defaultsort

You have been using Defaultsort incorrectly. It is not a big deal, but I thought you should know.

{{DEFAULTSORT:}} sets the default sorting for all the categories after the command. If one adds an explicit sorting, then it will use that one instead.

So
{{DEFAULTSORT:Birk, L.A.}}
[[Category:Taxon Authorities|, ]]

Actually sorts by the comma not by Birk, L.A.

Open2universe | Talk 17:43, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I changed my private "copy and paste" sample. Orchi (talk) 11:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Linnaea

Dear Orchi, could you please wait with editing Linnaea... I am in the middle of the editing and this is a tricky one... I took a pause as I need to eat :-) Uleli (talk) 19:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

....sorry, it was spontaneous playing with my favorite toy and I did not look for date. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 19:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

eMonocot

Hello Orchi
I have tried to make a template to add automatic links to the eMonocot site. I am sure it could be improved if I had better knowledge. Would you be able to pass it around your contacts for appraisal?
It is found as EMonocot and I have used it on Epidendroideae, Arethuseae and Arethusinae pages to test it.
ThanksAndyboorman (talk) 10:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I have removed your addition to template:WCSP as The World Checklist includes not only monocots. The link to Emonocot.org is not relevant in many cases. Uleli (talk) 07:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

It should be a test to find the eMonocot informations very quickly in all parts with a link to KEW. Orchi (talk) 09:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Orchi
I have modified your EMonocot template to make it more suitable for taxa above the genus it is here Template:Emocotfam and it also needs the ID number. I have begun to use this on the sub-families, tribes and sub-tribes and it seems to work well. I hope this is suitable for users.
I have finished all the generic info we have on the Orchidaceae pages including removal of most of the synonyms off the main pages. The Nothogenera are still to be completed as you can see.
Have you or others you know have any comments?
RegardsAndyboorman (talk) 15:52, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

...my only comment: you and your work are perfect. Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 15:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Orchi, Have a Happy Christmas and a fruitful New Year. I will be back to orchids soon - I have been working on Poaceae as these pages needed a lot of work in the same way that orchids did when we stated our collaboration. All the best Andy Andyboorman (talk) 19:12, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Geography

Hi Orchi Thanks for the great geographic resource. I notice that it seems to be the source used on WCSP, but they use a combination of numbers and language. I would be happier with just the names as it seems to me to be less confusing for users. What do you think?
I know its a bit more work, but I will use it and I guess we need to modify the orchid pages we have done! Any joy on the template? Do we need to reference on every genus and species page? Incidentally, I am not so sure that admins like User:Stho002 will be that happy with this additional reference, as they seem to prefer a minimal approach, any thoughts?
Back to orchids very soon! Regards Andyboorman (talk) 15:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Andy, thanks for your answer. I believe also, that the system without the numbers can be better understood. (Perhaps help the numbers by building a template). Here Elleanthus graminifolius and here Sobralia yauaperyensis I was and I'm testing. Maybe you can make suggestions there also. We have many time. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Orchi, I like your design for the template. I will try and explore its use in more detail in the very near future and give you more feedback. Have you shown it to others including admins? All the best Andyboorman (talk) 19:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Orchi, I do like the collapse box but find the text a big large - have a look at my suggestions for Elleanthus graminifolius. The numbers are fine, but just a bit more work editing pages that has already been started. A few thoughts Andyboorman (talk) 19:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Help

Have blocked and reverted. Accassidy (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Emonocot

Hi Orchi, The Emonocot site seems to be experiencing problems. Andyboorman (talk) 21:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello Andy, when the site is in function again, I will write you. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 12:19, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

NADI

Hi Orchi, I do like the Nadi template and it gives a great looking format. I have had a go on Aa - hope it is OK. All the best Andyboorman (talk) 14:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

....thanks for your answer. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 14:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Dipodium

Hi Orchi I have contacted Mr Rkitko on Wikicommons and suggest that he contacts André Schuiteman or Rafael Govaerts at Kew and have a word with them. If his evidence is robust as he says then he may even get a paper out of it! Rafael has made some changes to WCSP at even my suggestions.
As you know I agree with you with respect of Kew's lead role for the consensus for plant nomenclature and classification. They may not be correct in detail 100% of the time, but 99.9% is not bad after all! The majority of scientists I know agree with us, but sometimes it difficult to see your favourite plants dismembered by phylogenetic evidence and the concept of monophyly. However, the more I learn the more I realise that morphology can often be misleading, particularly with orchid flowers.
It is worth remembering that MBG and IPNI only publish the details of names including those that are unresolved and synonyms. Having said that MBG is beginning to evolve. Andyboorman (talk) 20:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Orchi I have sent a message to Rkitko's user page on Wikipedia about your offer to urge him to contact Kew. Hope it works! By the way you ought to accept the offer to become an admin here on WS! Andyboorman (talk) 18:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Admin

As one of the more active users on Wikispecies, I wonder if you would accept to be nominated as one of its Wikispecies:Administrators? Dan Koehl (talk) 09:17, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hello Dan Koehl,

First of all, I thank you for the your offer.

Unfortunately, my knowledge in English for this job is not in good quality,

but I promise, to continue my (hopefully good) work here.

Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 19:44, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Ania

Please refrain from engaging in an edit war on this! There is no canonical test of "accepted". If a taxonomic paper makes it past peer review in a "non-crank" journal, then it must be treated as accepted until there is published evidence to the contrary. Without this, the whole concept of Wikispecies would break down into chaos. For most groups of organisms, there simply isn't any meaningful notion of "accepted". Thanks, Stho002 (talk) 20:58, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

A Reply!

I did notice the problems you had with user:Stho002 over Tainia and I am sorry if it has made you upset. His tone can be very rude and I am sure he has been responsible for driving contributors off WS. I am glad you have chosen to ignore his comments, as I have in the past! The problem is that he is not always right, but still goes ahead like a bull in a china shop. I am not sure he understands in botany the difference between acceptance for publication in a peer reviewed journal and acceptance by the experts in the field. They are not the same and, as you and I know, there are plenty of examples where proposed changes have not been accepted and just faded away at best into synonymy or just end up on the unresolved list! I will also add a few comments on the thread I have started on the Pump, as it fits in with the valid name discussion. I will also add a brief note to the Tainia and Aniapages and see what happens. All the best and you have my support Andyboorman (talk) 12:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

....it's a very good feeling to be not alone. Thanks and best greetings. Orchi (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I have made the changes to Tainia and Ania. I wonder what will happen? Will user:Stho002 abuse admin rights? Who knows? Andyboorman (talk) 14:05, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I've made ​​many times before about this person my thoughts, but I'm too afraid to express my feelings and opinions in English. Orchi (talk) 14:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to intrude in this discussion, but I sympathize with your difficulties in dealing with Stho002. He's bullying everyone around here. I had, and am still having a hard time avoiding his "corrections".Mariusm (talk) 14:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Notes

Yes it is sad we can not just get on with our work, which is interesting, stimulating and also satisfying to see our progress! This 'war' between Stho002 and Mariusm is getting silly. I have had a few email conversations with Stho002 and he is worried that WS may be taken over by unscientific people from Wikipedia. It seems that he has been restricted from contributing to WP. He does very good work here, but that does not excuse his insistence that he is always right at times and his willingness to engage in confrontation. However, he is open to persuasion when given the evidence. Hopefully I have persuaded him that we also do good work here and he will more or less leave us alone. Your (our) work on Orchidaceae is taxonomically the best on the web and looks brilliant! The distribution work you have nearly completed is a major plus. You should be proud of your work there for such an important plant family. What next for you? Regards and best wishes Andyboorman (talk) 21:42, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

....first thank you very much for your very kind comment. My aims here? I try to connect the orchids with commons, wikidata and the international Wikipedias. Soon I will have some questions for you. (Translations of terms) Cheers. Orchi (talk) 12:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Seems very interesting keep me posted. Andyboorman (talk) 07:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

references

Some suggested changes, but I can not get Tropicos to indent! Andyboorman (talk) 12:37, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

...I have the same problem. (I search). Thanks and greetings. Orchi (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

...I found the reason. Solved.

By the way: My new book of Harry Zelenko is a wonderful work with nearly all Masdevallias. (My old favorites)

Also the Dissertation of Analisa Daniela Abele is good and very helpful in questions of the current taxonomy. Orchi (talk) 13:02, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Back to help you

Hi Please note the following:
Pots and kettles indeed. Bad habits indeed and it is not just me or Mariusm who feels bullied, as you are aware, Andrew. Forcing contributors into bad habits, indifferent structure, redundant and outdated terms or losing information is not very helpful. For myself, I am happy to have corrections, advice and follow suggestions. I am more than happy to have a more uniform structure on WS, but Stho002's form of structure has not been agreed, has had minimal discussion, often been rejected or indeed is sometimes wrong and lacking information for contemporary botanic taxonomy. This is a shame, as there are so many red links to deal with and pages with minimal content, I have done my best for now I feel.
Which I posted on OhanaUnited's page. As a consequence, I would like to offer my help as a collaborator on your contributions, but I am not really going to do much else here. Please let me know of work you would like me to undertake for the immediate future. All the best! Andyboorman (talk) 08:53, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Unbelievable

I can not understand what "that man" has done to Franz Xaver. I do not blame him from walking away. His original was far superior, but that is my opinion only. I hope you are not the next on his hit list. Watch your back. I will make up my mind in a day or two. Andyboorman (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Dear Andy, that is the way to banish a recognized botanical scientist from a renowned University. I'm still thinking which way we can pursue here. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Yes a genuine asset banished it must be Admin abuse locking him out without really looking at what he was doing. He was showing us a way of unlocking the accepted/unresolved dilemma! All over a format war, truly unbelievable. Unfortunately, the bureaucrats will support him as his raw edit score is so high, I feel. I also am uncertain as what to do. I have started a gentle discussion on OhanaUnited's page, but have not yet really pursued it and he has contributed there complete with insults - do have a look. Andyboorman (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Resrored Template:Nadi

I Restored Template:Nadi, but putting it back on pages from where is was removed is very time consuming, so I'm not pursuing it. I hope you'll get back to business. I assure you'll be protected now better against harassing. Mariusm (talk) 05:45, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings

Dear Orchi
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Moving house so will be rather quiet for a bit!
All the best Andyboorman (talk) 20:26, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Moty

Servus Orchi! Möglicherweise hast du nicht mitbekommen, dass auf Wikispecies:Village_Pump#A_new_category und Wikispecies:Village_Pump#Template_deletion über die Vorlage diskutiert wird, die ursprünglich du angelegt hast. Die Diskussion läuft derzeit wohl darauf hinaus, dass der Baustein durch eine Kategorie oder eine System von Kategorien ersetzt werden wird. Und dass "monotypische Arten" nicht markiert werden sollen. Anscheinend bist du der einzige, der die Vorlage auch für Arten verwendet. Möchtest du nicht dort auch noch deinen Standpunkt darlegen? Mir ist schon klar, das wir da abweichende Positionen haben. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 15:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Franz,

vielen Dank für Deine Nachricht. Ich habe die Diskussion registriert. Moty hatte ich vor vielen Jahren, wie auch in Commons (mit Übersetzungen und Link zum Artikel in der jeweiligen Sprache), eingerichtet. Insbesondere erschien es mir sinnvoll, die Genera mit nur einem Species zu kennzeichnen, da vielfach bei den "monotypischen Gattungen" die Gattungsartikel oder Gattungskategorien entfernt wurden und diese Arten den Familien zugewiesen wurden. Außerdem widmen 34 Wikipedias dem Begriff "monotypisch" einen eigenen Artikel.

Ich bin aber gerne bereit, Deinen fachlichen Argumenten zu folgen. Mein Herz hängt an "moty" nicht so, wie z.B. an Nadi. Ich schließe mich gern den von Dir vorgeschlagenen Regelungen an. Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:03, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

P.S.@Franz Xaver: ....wenn mal eine "Diskussionslücke" entstehen sollte, würde ich es sehr begrüßen, wenn WS zu einer einheitlichen, ausbaufähigen Vorlage für die Autoren kommen könnte. Sollte machbar sein.

Danke für die Antwort! Schaun ma halt, was da jetzt herauskommt. --Franz Xaver (talk) 18:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Join discussions

At the water pump is presently discussed two topics;

1.) is to follow a previous consensus and change all [[BASEPAGENAME]] into [[susbt:BASEPAGENAME]], something which already has started.

2.) is what to do with the Category: <<taxon name>> (<<any country>>) files created by Stephen Thorpe. Some 5 000 have so far been moved together at Candidates for speedy deletion, but concearn has been objected, that some of those files may be useful, in all, or that parts should be transfered somewhere, before a major mass delete. Please join the discussion at pump and take part in shaping a consensus.

Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Application for Checkuser

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)

Another application for Check User

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)

Additional Checkuser Application

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)

Standing for role of checkUser

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)

RFC on Checkusers

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)

Request for vote reg use of BASEPAGENAME

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)

Wikispecies Oversighter

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)

Oversight nomination

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)

tysp and tg templates

It looks like it is a behind the scenes coding issue. I have asked Tommy Kronkvist if he can enlighten us. Regards and good work yourself Andyboorman (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

...thank you - you always find ways to solve. Best regards. Orchi (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Hi Orchi. Great edits as usual and well done in keeping Orchidaceae to to date. All the best for Christmas and the New Year. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 20:25, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Servus! Ich wünsch Dir ebenfalls ein frohes Weihnachtsfest und alles Gute für 2018. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Hallo Orchi, vielen Dank für deine Weihnachtsgrüße. Ich wünsche auch dir ein gutes Neues Jahr, und weiterhin frohes Schaffen. Herzlichen Gruß von --Thiotrix (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

common.js

Hi Orchi. Are there any updates to the above for creating redirects in a list of synonyms? If so I may need a reload. Please remind me how I get others to upload it, as it has been a few years. Cheers. Andyboorman (talk) 08:41, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Andy, there is not an update in „commons.js“. The creator of this tool (Rillke) is unfortunately in Wikipeda no more activ. Do you want extensions or can I help? Cheers. Orchi (talk) 11:19, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Orchi, could you look here and let me know what has gone wrong. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 17:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Seems OK now but still check please. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 18:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Andy, I suggest you copy this page [1] completely to this page [2]. Can you do that as an admin? Cheers. Orchi (talk) 19:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Genera Orchidacearum und Elleanthus aurantiacus

Servus Orchi! Gestern hab ich mich bei Elleanthus aurantiacus betätigt. Dabei ist mir aufgefallen, dass du offenbar generell auch bei Artartikeln "Genera Orchidacearum" als Referenz verwendest. Ich hab dann in Internet gesucht, ob ich irgendeinen dieser Bände finde, um mir ein Bild zu machen, welche Art von Information typischerweise dort zu finden ist. Nach dem, was ich jetzt hier und hier gesehen habe, kann man diese Referenzen recht gut für Gattungsartikel verwenden, für Artartikel, denke ich, sollte man sie aber besser nicht nehmen. Beispielsweise wird der Name Dichaea ancoraelabia im entsprechenden Band nicht einmal erwähnt. Andererseits denke ich, dass es sinnvoll ist, so wie ich es bei Elleanthus aurantiacus begonnen habe, Links zu den entsprechenden Originaldiagnosen zu setzen. Wenn man das macht, findet man immer wieder einmal den einen oder anderen Fehler, den man dann zumindest für WS korrigieren kann. Beispielsweise geben IPNI und WCSP beim Namen Elleanthus bractescens die falsche Seite an – Tropicos ist in diesem Fall korrekt. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 12:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Hallo Franz Xaver,

vielen Dank für Deine Nachricht und Deine Empfehlungen. Von "Genera Orchidacearum" habe ich leider nur die Auflistung der Gattungen. Ich werde in Zukunft die Referenz nur noch bei den Gattungsartikeln angeben; es sei denn, die Information zu einem Artartikel steht mir zu Verfügung. Leider habe ich die teueren sechs Bände nicht; ich muss sie mir leihen. In den nächsten zwei Wochen bin ich unterwegs und habe nur ein kleines Netbook bei mir. Ich hoffe, ich kann das eine oder andere Foto machen. Nach dieser Zeit werde ich mich nochmals mit Fragen an Dich wenden und meine Vorlagen nach Absprache mit Dir anpassen. In KEW werden z.Z. viele Gattungen neu bewertet. Leider ist es hier in WS sehr aufwändig, bestehende Artikel an andere Gattungen anzupassen und die Synonyme anzugleichen. Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:12, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

TPLF

I changed TPLF template to reflect that it has not been updated since 2013. It is not regularly or continuously updated like most other secondary sources. Hope this explains my decision. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 07:52, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Dear Andy, ....I only had the creation date of the page in view. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

• P.S. A further theme I will open on your diskussion page. (e-monocot)

Taxonavigation

Vidíš nějaký rozdíl?/See you any diference? --Rosičák (talk) 20:22, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Only a very small difference. Before and after the equal signs a blank line (as in all these templates and easier for changes by a bot).

Pouze velmi malý rozdíl. Před a po rovných znaménkách je prázdný řádek (jako u všech těchto šablon a snazší pro změny bot).Orchi (talk) 20:53, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Redirects

Hello Orchi. I have lost Redirects from Tools. Is yours still OK? Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 16:02, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello Andy, for a longer time the tool with the browser opera 12.17 (which I mainly use for Wiki) is not in function. With the Vivaldi and the Firefox ESR browsers the function is o.k. Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 16:31, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

...please try my short form of /common.js

....with === Synonyms === with "int:" in the text, there is no fuction. Use for working temporarily the old version ===Synonyms===

Works OK now thanks! Andyboorman (talk) 17:35, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

VN invoke

Hello, this editing reduces the content of the project because content is more limited on wikidates. Dropped out, for example sk=áron škvrnitý. In addition, Wikidata contained spelling mistakes. Try to think more of it than use the subprogram that I personally hold my thumbs on. Please do not take it as a warning. I would like to put my hand to the work if you tell me in advance where and how you want to proceed in this praiseworthy work. --Rosičák (talk) 03:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

...thanks for your changes in Wikidata. My computer keyboard does not have all the special letters. Therefore, I copy in Wikidata (Wikilinks) the headings of the articles. Orchi (talk) 17:04, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Best Wishes

Vielen Dank für die Glückwünsche. Frohe Weihnachten und ein sehr glückliches 2019. Best regards and happy editing. Andyboorman (talk) 09:31, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

DISPLAYTITLE in Template:Genusxxx

Servus! Ich hab gerade Deine Änderung in Template:Melocactus wieder rückgängig gemacht. Das Problem dieses "Zauberworts" in den Gattungsvorlagen ist, dass es zur Folge hat, dass Titel in untergeordneten Unterarten oder Varietäten dann nicht mehr korrekt angezeigt werden. Beispielsweise bei Melocactus curvispinus subsp. dawsonii soll ja das Wörtchen "subsp." nicht kursiv angezeigt werden. Zwar kann man sich mit dem Zusatz "noerror" behelfen, wenn man weiß, wo die Ursache für fehlerhaftes Anzeigen und Fehlermeldung ist, aber für Neueinsteiger ist das vermutlich eine unüberwindliche Hürde, herauszufinden, was in diesem Fall zu tun wäre. Deshalb denke ich dass, dieses "Zauberwort" immer nur dort stehen sollte, wo es seine Wirkung entfaltet, und nicht in einer für einen Neuling unsichtbaren Vorlage. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Guten Tag Franz, habe ich Dich richtig verstanden, dass ich das "Zauberwort" bei Artikeln, die nicht von mir erstellt wurden oder werden, nicht mehr verwenden soll? Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, ich denke, dass die Vorlage grundsätzlich der falsche Platz dafür ist, ganz egal, wer der Autor ist. In den Art- und Gattungsartikeln selbst verwende ich das "Zauberwort" natürlich schon. Dort ist es dann auch für jeden sichtbar und kann nicht für Verwirrung sorgen. Aber wenn ich Dich nicht von meiner Auffassung überzeugen kann, dann werde ich Dir natürlich nicht hinterherlaufen. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 19:45, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

....bei allen Genera der Orchideen ist das "Zauberwort" im template bereits vorhanden. Ich werde mich mit dem Ensatz von "noerror" auf diesen Bereich beschränken. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:02, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Um den Effekt von DISPLAYTITLE in der Vorlage besser zu verdeutlichen 2 Beispiele: (1) In Arum italicum subsp. italicum gibt es kein weiteres "Zauberwort" und hier wird mehr kursiv angezeigt als sein sollte. (2) In Arum orientale subsp. orientale gibt es so eine DISPLAYTITLE-Anweisung (soeben von mir eingefügt), aber ohne den Zusatz "noerror", und somit wird der Titel auch nicht richtig angezeigt, aber zusätzlich erscheint eine Fehlermeldung - genau so hat bis heute am Morgen der Titel in der oben erwähnten Melocactus-Unterart ausgesehen. Wenn man so ein Zauberwort in einer Vorlage einfügt, wirkt sich das in allen untergeordneten Seiten aus, aber niemand geht die einzeln durch und korrigiert allenfalls durch die Einfügung hervorgerufene Fehler. Und eine allenfalls vorhandene Beobachtungsliste zeigt auch nichts an, weil ja die Änderung anderswo passiert ist. Grüße --Franz Xaver (talk) 20:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you help

Please see Gavilea longibracteata I have tried helping this relatively new editor see Penarc Talk Page, but something is going wrong in translation! I am getting a bit fed up with giving advice that is ignored and trying to knock the pages into more or less WS format and quality. Well meaning, but not learning. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Dear Andy, ....I hope itis in form. ;-). Cheers. Orchi (talk) 19:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Dracaena (Asparagaceae)

Hi Orchi. We deliberately left out the species belonging to Sansevieria after the discussion on the pump. It would be best to revert your well meaning edits for now until there is greater acceptance of Christenhusz, M.J.M., Fay, M.F. & Byng, J.W. (eds). 2018. The Global Flora, Vol. 4: Special Edition, GLOVAP Nomenclature Part 1. Plant Gateway Ltd., Bradford. Leaving them on Dracaena contradicts the note on the taxon page. Have a chat with @Dracaenaworldwide: who has authored {{Damen et al., 2018}} I think his German is good. Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 21:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Dear Andy, thanks for your information. I did'nt see this discussion. I wanted to help a new (good) user here. I reset my wrong changes. Regards. Orchi (talk) 21:25, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Changes were not "wrong" perhaps just premature! Andyboorman (talk) 21:28, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

....a case for professionals in Dracaena. Orchi (talk) 21:34, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

....and it going to split opinion! Andyboorman (talk) 21:40, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Fungi

Thanks very much your copyedit in Sphacelotheca--Penarc (talk) 15:17, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

...little help. Orchi (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Formatierung von Lebensdaten

Hallo Orchi, danke für die Verbesserung und Standardisierung vieler Autorenseiten. Nur eine Kleinigkeit: zur Formatierung von Lebensdaten der Taxon-Autoren und anderen "von–bis"-Spannen benutzen wir nicht den einfachen Trennstrich, sondern den sogenannten "Halbgeviertstrich" (entweder bei den Sonderzeichen zu finden, oder die linke Alt-Taste gedrückt halten und auf dem rechten Zahlenblock 0150 eintippen). Freundliche Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 12:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

@Thiotrix: Hallo Thiotrix, ich danke Dir für diese Information. Ich hätte zwar früher schon fragen können, aber dieses "Problem" war für mich immer ein "Buch mit sieben Siegeln", da ich optisch keinen Unterschied bei den Strichen erkennen konnte. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 15:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Redirect script

Hi Orchi importScript('User:Rillke/createRedirects.js') does not work at the moment. Any idea why not? Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Andy, ....unfortunately, no. I think it's a problem of wiki software. Yesterday I was hoping, that the problem will be solved overnight like many other disorders lately. Maybe Rillke knows more, if he has read your message. Regards. Orchi (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Orchi, you are probably right. I am not sure @Rillke: is currently active. I will try to pursue this through other editors here on WS, as well. Regards Andyboorman (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Andy, ....thank you for your effort. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 19:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Dear Andy, I sent a message to Magnus Manske ([3]. Regards. Orchi (talk) 11:24, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Dear Andy, I believe, User:Krinkle had repaired our redirect. My tests were positive. Could you please change: Line 56 in User:Rillke/createRedirects.js to "token: mw.user.tokens.get('csrfToken'),". I hope, that we have our tools back. Regards. Orchi (talk) 11:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Dear Orchi - Solved. Many thanks. Andyboorman (talk) 17:40, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Typus Belege

Hallo Orchi, ist es hier bei Wikispecies angedacht auch Typus-Exemplare in einem eigenen Abschnitt zu benennen und ggf. zu digitalen Herbarien zu verlinken? Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 11:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ich schlage vor, dass Du bei einer Art ein Muster nach Deinen Vorstellungen gestaltest. Generell werden solche Informationen beim "Name" oder unter "Weblinks" gezeigt. Wenn Dein Vorschlag zu einer Änderung der Seitengestaltung führt, müsste man gegebenenfalls die Überlegung zur Diskussion stellen (ist hier so üblich). Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi: Hi Orchi, ich habe mal eine Probe erstellt https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Badlydrawnboy22/Typus. Da ich jetzt bei der Darstellungsgestalltung nicht so fit bin, muss man das noch optimieren. Ich habe die Herbarien zum Index Herbarorium verlinkt, wusste jetzt nicht ob es eine wiki-interne Herbarien-Liste gibt. Die Herbarbelege habe ich als Barcode-Nummern zum digitalen Herbarium verlinkt. Könnte man sicher auch anders machen. Kannst ja ggf. optimieren und kommentieren was du dazu meinst. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 18:31, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ich habe Deine Daten analog zu anderen Seiten einmal hier übertragen: User:Orchi/sandbox 2. Eine exzellente Expertin in taxonomischen Fragen ist User:Thiotrix. Ich werde die Fragen zur korrekten Gestaltung bei ihr hinterfragen. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 19:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi: Hallo Orchi, ich sehe dass du das anders anordnen würdest. In deinem Fall gibst du den selben Herbarbeleg für Basionym und homotypische Synonyme an, was ja doppelt und eigentlich unnötig ist. Die homotypischen Synonyme leiten sich ja alle vom Basionym ab. Ich tendiere eher für einen eigenen Abschnitt, da Typus-Exemplare schon sehr wichtig sind. In dem Fall werden aber die homo- bzw. heterotypischen Synonyme doppelt angeben. Auch nicht optimal, gebe ich zu. Mal schauen was User:Thiotrix vorschlägt. Vielleicht auch ganz unnötig die Idee. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:57, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ....ich freue mich auf Lösungsvorschläge oder Empfehlungen von Thiotrix. Grüße. Orchi (talk)

Hallo Orchi und Badlydrawnboy22, die Typusbelege werden in Wikispecies direkt im "Name"-Abschnitt beim Basionym zitiert, als Beispiel siehe Gomphrena conica. Die Formatierung ist wohl nicht strikt festgelegt, man kann für Isotypen auch eine neue Zeile anfangen, um es übersichtlicher zu gestalten. Für Beispiele von Syntypen und Lektotypen siehe Gomphrena conferta und Gomphrena canescens. Die Autoren der Lektotypisierung sind hier ebenso von Interesse, das entsprechende Literaturzitat kann bei Primärliteratur einsortiert werden. Sofern bekannt, sollten auch bei jedem heterotypischen Basionym die Typusinformationen ergänzt werden. Die Sortierung der heterotypischen Synonyme erfolgt dann am besten nicht alphabetisch nach Gattungsnamen, sondern fasst die auf einem gemeinsamen Typus beruhenden Namen zusammen (beispielsweise alphabetisch nach Art-Epithet sortieren). Links zu Fotos der Herbarexemplare sind sehr willkommen, die Barcodes sollten aber auch sichtbar sein und nicht im Link versteckt. Man kann ebenfalls zu Herbarien verlinken, mit Doppelklammern[[K]] landet man auf der entsprechenden Seite K bei Wikispecies (die wiederum zum Index Herbariorum führt), mit dem template Repository link {{Rl|K}} wird die Artenseite zusätzlich in der Kategorie für das Herbarium Category:K einsortiert. Viele Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 07:55, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

@Thiotrix: @Badlydrawnboy22:

Hallo Thiotrix,

ganz herzlichen Dank für Deine sehr ausführliche Antwort und Anleitung zur korrekten Wiki-Form. Ich bin froh, dass ich bei Wissenslücken Menschen kenne, die man um guten Rat fragen kann.

Mit Deinen Beschreibungen und Beispielen zur obigen Fragestellung stehen gute Werkzeuge zur Verfügung. Ich freue mich, dass Badlydrawnboy22 seine Kenntnisse hier einbringen will,

neue Artikel zu gestalten und/oder bereits in Standardform bestehenden Artikel wissenschaftlich "veredeln" möchte.

Nochmals danke und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:40, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

P.S. In naher Zukunft werde ich Dich um eine Meinung zur Gestaltung der sehr großen Bild- und Textgallerien (z.B. Dendrobium, Bulbophyllum etc.) in Commons fragen. Ich habe einen Vorschlag.

@Thiotrix: @Orchi:

Hallo ihr beiden,

ich bedanke mich auch für die ausführliche Beantwortung meines Anliegens. Jetzt weiß ich was ich machen muss. Wie sieht es denn noch mit einer Verlinkung des Zitats zu digitalisierten Publikationen für die einzelnen Namen aus? Ist das auch gewollt? Ich habe das mal für Gastrochilus acaulis durchexerziert. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 11:27, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

....das ist natürlich perfekt und eine weitere "Veredelung" der Artikel. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: Für die Verlinkung der Zitate bei BiodiversityLibrary oder anderen Online-Bibliotheken wird der Link jeweils auf die Seitenzahl gesetzt. Es gibt zwei Möglichkeiten: Bei kurzen Taxonseiten mit wenig Synonymen wie im Beispiel Gomphrena conferta, dort stehen die Links zur zitierten Seite direkt hinter der Primärliteratur. Bei zahlreichen Synonymen ist es übersichtlicher, direkt in der Synonymliste zu verlinken (siehe meine Änderungen bei Gastrochilus acaulis). – Für jede Primärliteratur legt man am besten jeweils ein Reference Template (Vorlage) an (Anleitung siehe Help:Reference section#Reference Templates), dann braucht man es nur einmal einzugeben, und kann das Template gleich auf den Seiten aller Autoren eintragen. Es spart wirklich Zeit, auch wenn man später noch Ergänzungen am Zitat hat, z.B. online-Zugänge oder doi-Nummern. Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 14:12, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi:Ok, dann mache ich so weiter. Habe heute auch mehrere Herbarien (K, W, PE) angeschrieben und um Digitalisierung einiger Holotypen gebeten... Dauert aber sicher etwas. Bei den Gastros gehe ich auch alphabetisch durch undTrage Typuslokalität und Typus nacheinander ein. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 16:21, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

---

@Badlydrawnboy22: ....ich baue schon mal das "Gerüst" für die Gattung. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: ...kannst Du bitte den von Dir gesetzten Link hier: Gastrochilus brevifimbriatus mal überprüfen. Ich komme dort nicht zum Ziel- Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi: meintest du das Herbarium?? Anscheinend gibt es mehrere SM oder im Wiki ist es nicht drin. Habe den Link zum Index Herbarorium gesetzt. Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 17:09, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: ....den Link beim Namen: Novon 20: 113 (2010). Orchi (talk) 17:13, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

@Orchi: bei mir geht es. Ich komme zum Artikel. Der Link wäre auch möglich. Ist dann keine Weiterleitung. https://bioone.org/journals/novon-a-journal-for-botanical-nomenclature/volume-20/issue-1/2008013/Gastrochilus-brevifimbriatus-Orchidaceae-Aeridinae-a-New-Species-from-Chongqing-China/10.3417/2008013.short Habe es mal geändert. Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

....danke! Orchi (talk) 17:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Tuberolabium

Hi Orchi, hier mache ich erstmal weiter. Das mit der Nadi kriege ich noch nicht hin, vielleicht kannst du das ergänzen und auch POWO und Tropicos falls nötig. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, Du legst ja ein gewaltiges Tempo vor. Die neuen Artikel, die Du unter Tuberolabium angelegt hast, werde ich mit aktueller Formatierung (die ändert sich hier gelegentlich) versehen. Beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Typus und Anderes from Acampe

Hi Orchi, Acampe rigida ist jetzt nur noch Synonym zu praemorsa (Siehe Artikel dazu: http://skvortsovia.uran.ru/2018/4301.pdf und https://www.mapress.com/j/pt/article/view/phytotaxa.303.3.7). Es gab da auch einige heterotypische Synonymisierungen (im Phytotaxa-Artikel) die bei KEW aber noch nicht drin sind. Der jetzige Datenbankzustand macht es sehr kompliziert es hier umzusetzen. Z.B. zeigt die Zeichnung von Pantling (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Acampe_praemorsa_var._praemorsa_(as_Saccolabium_papillosum)_-_The_Orchids_of_the_Sikkim-Himalaya_pl_290_(1898).jpg) nicht A. praemorsa sondern Acampe carinata. Ich muss mal schauen ob ich Zeit finde um Rafael anzuschreiben und ihn frage ob er das noch einbauen wird. Bin ab Montag in HD an meiner neuen Arbeitsstelle. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 17:21, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Belongs here or VP. Andyboorman (talk) 17:58, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22:

Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ...wer ist eigentlich noch in der Lage, die Umbenennungen der Arten und Gattungen nachzuhalten und nachzuvollziehen. Emil Lückel hat mir vor längerer Zeit in einem Gespräch gesagt, jährlich würden weltweit ca. 30000 wissenschaftliche Artikel zu den Orchideen geschrieben. KEW mit etwa 150 Mitarbeitern brauche ungefähr ein bis eineinhalb Jahre, um zu den Arbeiten Stellung zu beziehen.

Ich wünsche Dir einen guten Start in Deinem neuen Beruf in Heidelberg. Heidelberg ist eine wunderbare Stadt, die ich in bester Errinnerung habe. Besonders gern war ich zu Zeiten von Karlheinz Senghas im botanischen Garten der Stadt. Er gründete auch die "Orchideen-Gesellschaft-Kurpfalz e.V." in Mannheim, die bis heute sehr lebendig besteht. Einmal, am 1. Freitag im Monat, findet in Mannheim ein Vortrag satt. Ich besuche die Veranstaltungen nicht jedesmal, aber ich fahre gern zu interessanten Vorträgen. Das Programm für 2020 ist jetzt online (2020). Es sind wieder einige gute Vorträge im Programm. Dir alles Gute in Heidelberg und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Likewise Orchi. Seasons greetings! Andyboorman (talk) 09:29, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für deine freundlichen Grüße, auch dir wünsche ich ein gutes und gesundes Neues Jahr 2020. Herzlichen Gruß von --Thiotrix (talk) 12:49, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Template:Tysp

@Orchi:
Hallo Orchi, mir ist aufgefallen, dass bei der Darstellung des Templats "tysp" nach dem Doppelpunkt zwei Leerezeichen gesetzt werden. Da ich mich mit Templaten nicht auskenne, wende ich mich an dich damit das ggf. korrigiert wird. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 22:22, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ...stört mich auch schon länger, aber ich weiß nicht, es zu ändern. Gruß. Orchi (talk) 22:35, 28 December 2019 (UTC

@Orchi:
Hi, hab es gelöst bzw. korrigiert. :-D Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 10:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Campanula

Why did you get back campanula. You think I did vandalism.--Fagus (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

I have not found a source for this species name. Give it please. If I had meant vandalism, I would have said that. Orchi (talk) 15:53, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331982687_A_new_bellflower_Campanula_phitosiana_sp_nov_Campanulaceae_from_Western_Anatolia_Turkey --Fagus (talk) 16:07, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Section

@Orchi: Hi Orchi, kannst du vielleicht für die Varietäten in der Taxonavigation noch die Section einpflegen? Ich weiß leider noch nicht wie das geht. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22:

Hallo Badlydrawnboy22, ich musste auch erst einmal überlegen. Kam nicht mehr so häufig vor. Bei Anacamptis bin ich fündig geworden.

Ich verbinde diese Antwort mit einer Frage: Was hälst Du davon, bei der Quellenangabe, wenn vorhanden, einen Link zur pdf.- Datei zu legen. Ich habe unter "Primärliteratur" bei Cleisostoma phitamii mal ein Muster angelegt.

Wie Du siehst, habe ich unsere Fragen vom Artikel nach hier verlegt (bevor es andere tun ;-). Grüße. Orchi (talk) 21:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Orchi: Hallo Orchi, ich lese deine Antwort leider erst jetzt, da ich dich bitten wollte für Cleisostoma odoratum die Sektion einzubauen. Die Art gehört zur Sektion Cleisostoma. Das mit der pdf sieht gut aus. Werde ich dran denken. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Sarcanthus filiformis

Hallo @Orchi:, den Namen gibt es als Sarcanthus filiformis Lindl. (= Cleisostoma filiforme) und als Sarcanthus filiformis Wight (=Cleisostomopsis filiformis). Vielleicht kannst du die entsprechende 'disambig'-Seite anlegen? Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 20:06, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Hallo @Badlydrawnboy22:, ....die Seite ist angelegt. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 22:02, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Danke! Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22 & Orchi: A great example of how community team work can help solving even small problems. Thank you both! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC).

@Tommy Kronkvist:....thanks for your kind note. Regards. Orchi (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Tommy Kronkvist: Sometimes it feels like a symbiosis... ;-). I start something and Orchi finishes it. Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:40, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Hallo @Orchi:, vielleicht wäre es auch sinncoll für Sarcanthus Lindl., Bot. Reg. 10: t. 817 (1824) (= Acampe) und Sarcanthus Lindl., Coll. Bot.: t. 39B (1826), nom. illeg. (=Cleisostoma) eine Disambig-Seite anzulegen. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 21:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Hallo @Badlydrawnboy22:, vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Ich habe die Seite angelegt. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

p.s. .. Ihr seid bei Herrn Senger angekündigt.

Grafia

Hallo @Orchi:, die Gattung Grafia Rchb., (Fam. Apiaceae) ist eine akzeptierte Gattung. Wie löst man das mit Grafia A.D.Hawkes (= Phalaenopsis)? Homonym auf der Grafia Rchb.-Seite erwähnen? Die Disambig-Seite ist ja so nicht richtig. Die Weiterleitung zu Phalaenopsis war es aber auch nicht. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:44, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Hallo @Badlydrawnboy22:, danke für den Hinweis. Ich habe die Seite Grafia erneuert. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:35, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

P.S. gleich noch eine E-Mail.

Trivialnamen

Hallo @Orchi:, ich mal wieder mit einer Frage. Ich habe gesehen, dass man die Trivialnamen bei wikidata eingeben kann. Verstehe nur nicht so ganz wie das abläuft... Ich habe für einige japanische Orchideen diese Seite gefunden: http://www.ne.jp/asahi/calypso/lip/japanwild.htm
Der chinesische Name für Gastrochilus japonicus scheint mir eher zu Gastrochilus somae zu gehören. Zumindest gibt es auf Taiwan erstere Art nicht und bei einer google suche erhalte ich nur Bilder von somae. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Hallo @Badlydrawnboy22:, die Seite mit den heimischen japanischen Namen ist interessant, aber ob die japanischen Namen in dieser Liste richtg und gebräuchlich sind, kann wahrscheinlich nur ein Einheimischer beurteilen. Ich überlege mal, wen wir fragen könnten.

Wenn ich in Wikidata Trivialnamen einfüge, nehme ich nur den Namen der landeseigenen Wikipedia Artikel (mit einigen Ausnahmen in englisch).

So auch bei Gastrochilus japonicus. Zu Gastrochilus somae gibt es nach Wikidata keinen chinesischen WP-Artikel.

Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

...schau bitte mal hier: Anfrage]

Hallo @Orchi:, dass die Namen stimmen weiß ich nur aus eigener Erfahrung durch Suche damit nach Bildern... Ich schaue mal ob ich ein frei zugängliches Floren-Werk finde in dem die einheimischen Namen vermerkt sind. Vielleicht kann uns aber Alpsdake schon weiterhelfen, danke! Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

In der Flora of Japan, Seite 319 (1965) sind die einheimischen Namen nur in Transkription drin... und hier stehen sie nicht drin BRAHMS:Flora of Japan, die japanische Datenbank ist nicht erreichbar Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

#REDIRECT

Hallo @Orchi: Könntest du vielleicht dein REDIRECT-Tool über Tulipa sylvestris subsp. australis jagen? Das war an sich schon viel Arbeit die Seite so zu erstellen, die Autoren zu verlinken mag ich auch nicht mehr... GrußBadlydrawnboy22 (talk) 14:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC) Und wenn du schon dabei bist: Tulipa sylvestris subsp. primulina und Tulipa sylvestris subsp. sylvestris. Danke!!!Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 15:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

@Orchi: Danke! Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Reference page

Hi @Orchi:: weißt du wie man das obere Templat bearbeiten kann? Mich stört der . (Punkt) am Ende, wieso ist dort kein : ??? Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC) Hat sich erledigt! Musste nur mein Templat anpassen! >>

• Garay, L.A. 1972. On the Systematics of the Monopodial Orchids I. Botanical Museum Leaflets, Harvard University 23(4): 149–212. BHL Reference page.  Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Bogoria

Hi @Orchi: habe gesehen, dass die Gattung Gunnarella de facto aufgelöst wurde. Blöd nur, dass der Jones andere Arten nicht korrekt versetzt hat und die Gattung jetzt quasi ohne Typus-Art dasteht. Ich wundere mich wieso die WCSP ihm überhaupt folgt, der hat schon so manchen Murks verzapft. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 18:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: This will have to be in English. A genus does not automatically become invalid, if it does not have a type species, as long as the original generic description still stands. The type species becomes non designatus and there are numerous examples of this situation. Ideally, if the genus is to remain, Gunnarella should be monographed and a new type and lecotype type be designated, but this is not essential for the validity of the genus. I am not prepared to go behind the paywall for Australian Orchid Review, so can not comment on Clements and Jones' work in this instance, but the former is one of the most highly regarded scientific orchidists and the later also has a very good track record both in orchid horticulture and collecting. However, WCSP is clear in not following their dismantling of Gunnarella in favour of their combinations in Drymoanthus probably due to problems with "without exact basionym page" for at least one species amongst other possible problems requiring wider review and consensus. Hope this helps. Andyboorman (talk) 19:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: Hello Andy, KEW continues to define Gunnarella as a valid genus and MBG shows Bogoria raciborskiias a type species. I contact User:Badlydrawnboy22 in this question during the next days. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 20:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

@Badlydrawnboy22: Thanks Orchi. Clearly Clements and Jones wanted to dismantle Gunnarella and allocate its combinations between Bogoria and Drymoanthus, but Kew resisted the later. We poor mortals are not fully cognisant of Kews' full reasonings and just have to accept the situation and so Gunnarella is accepted for now. Life and taxonomy is full of imperfections! Hopefully you and all around you are safe in these strange times. Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 20:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Ridleya disambiguation page

Hello friend. I don´t think it is correct categorizing a disambiguation page with author taxa and eponym. What I would do is creating the right page or a redirection in the case of a synonym, and there OK putting the corresponding categories. By the way, the disambiguation page should be renamed Ridleya (disambiguation). Do you agree? Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:23, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Orchi and @Hector Bottai:. No disambiguation page that I am aware of is named Taxon Name (disambiguation). To change the format now would be a backward step causing numerous changes to the names of pages. I also think that the other points you note fall under the discretion of the editor and if they are to be discouraged will need a Pump discussion. It is, however, important to link out from the disambig page to the accepted names. In conculsion, Ridleya is a perfectly acceptable disambig page under current practice, IMHO. Hope this helps. Andyboorman (talk) 07:29, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hector Bottai:, @Hector Bottai:

Hello, I don't have time right now and will answer about later. Sorry and best greetings. Orchi (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Andy, hello Hector Botta,

I have adopted this type of design from various (botanical) authors here.

I also consider the assignment of the taxon names to the category of the authors as a sensible thing, as in all other taxon descriptions.

In the specific case of the taxon is the author "Ridleya" and should be treated as author of other taxon.

For the treatment of eponyms I don't know other or better solution. Regards. Orchi (talk) 20:37, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I see where the problem is coming from! This was a redirection of Ridleya Pfitzer to Thrixspermum and was converted into a Disambiguation page by @Caftaric: without creating a new page for the former redirection. Incorrectly done on my point of view. What I did is re-creating the redirection Ridleya Pfitzer and categoryzing it, which is the right thing to do. I hope you agree. When somebody creates the page Ridleya (Charopidae) will have to put the right categories there. Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:08, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Andyboorman: @Orchi: Regarding Taxon name (disambiguation), see this case: Aglaia (disambiguation), Aglaia (Plantae) is a valid genus, with several utilizations while Aglaia Swainson is only an obsolete genus, a synonym. That was the solution adopted. And there are more examples. Unfortunatelly I cannot remember who encouraged me to adopt this solution instead of changing the name of Aglaia (Plantae). This solution is not new and extensively used in other wikis when certain name should be preserved as main page. Just one of many examples, try in the EN wiki: Churchill and Churchill (disambiguation). Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Hector Bottai: The usual way of dealing with this is to change the name of the main taxon page - see Aglaia , but a major change would require a Pump discussion. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 09:59, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Page history gone: W. van Deventer

You created the new page W. Deventer, but we already had W. van Deventer. Therefore, page history is gone. Next time, just move the page to correct title and page history retains--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Creation of Author templates are stopped!

Hey, Orchi! Please see: User_talk:MILEPRI#Creation_of_Author_templates_are_stopped!--Estopedist1 (talk) 10:42, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Photos

Is it possible to have my photos deleted from wikipedia? if i request that all the photos, i uploaded be removed — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raabbustamante (talk • contribs) 13:48, 4 November 2020‎.

Hello Raab Bustamante, unfortunately I cannot answer your question, because I am not familiar with the legal regulations of Wikipedia. An admin in Commons should be able to answer your question. However, I believe, that deleting your pictures will not be easy. Regards. Orchi (talk) 19:25, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

P.S. By the way. I was hoping to see more rare pictures of you here. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Orchi (talk • contribs) 4 November 2020‎.

new species/publication Templates

I need template for species entry, and how this piblications are cited in the entries about botanists — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raabbustamante (talk • contribs) 6 November 2020‎.

...answered by User:Estopedist1 on your User talk:Raabbustamante. Orchi (talk) 11:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Orchi, thanks for creating the Goodyera umbrosa page! I'm the user previously known as JadeSpire; I recently got a username change. :) — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nicholaswei (talk • contribs) 12 November 2020.

I need help adding my other paper:

Rediscovery of a lost type: solving the mysterious identity of Amorphophallus longispathaceus Engl. & Gehrm. (Araceae) Rene Alfred Anton Bustamante, Maverick N. Tamayo, Wilbert Hetterscheid — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raabbustamante (talk • contribs) 1 December 2020.

Melaleuceae

Hi Orchi. I noticed that you made some edits in the Melaleuceae tribe for Beaufortia. I hope you noticed that this is a difficult one. WCSP holds that all of the genera in the tribe are synonymised with an expanded Melaleuca with Edwards et al. (2010) being the main reference and I have another to add as well. The only reason I have not made the required changes on WS is that it seems that not all botanists and conservationists in Australia follow these changes. If you have a look through Australian Plant Census you will see what I mean, as they are very ambiguous with circumscriptions and synonymy. WP is not much help! Frankly I left editing hoping a consensus would emerge. Have a look here for The World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP) for Callistemon. What do you think? Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 11:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear Andy,

thanks for your changes. After my changes I saw, that the genus was not clearly assessed. I can't say anything about taxonomy. I thought, I was just doing editorial things.

Thanks for your help and best regards. Orchi (talk) 15:19, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

All the best 2021

Dear @Orchi: Thank you for your kind message on my talk page.
I would also like to wish you all the best for this new year.
Along with many we hope for a new beginning after this unfortunate pandemic and for us in the UK - Brexit.
Meanwhile I also hope to edit without too many controversies!
Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 20:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Neujahrsgrüße

Hallo Orchi, vielen Dank für deine freundlichen Neujahrsgrüße. Ich wünsche auch dir ein gutes und gesundes Jahr 2021. Und natürlich weiterhin Freude bei der stetigen Verbesserung "unserer" Wikis. Herzliche Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 12:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

References and Links

Guten Tag @Thiotrix: schlug vor, dies von seiner Diskussionsseite zu kopieren. Hoffe es hilft und viele Grüße. Andyboorman (talk) 13:54, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I got to your prior discussion through template Chase et al., 2015. I would like to point out that World Checklist of Selected Plant Families, Kew Science Plants of the World online and The Plant List are all from the same stable, as we say in England, that is Kew Gardens and their world-wide collaborators. The Plant List is now 7 years out of date and no longer updated, it is also more or less replaced by Kew Science Plants of the World online. World Checklist of Selected Plant Families is the most authoritative, as it has been through more scrutiny. However, it is also restrictive as it does not post partially completed families that still require additional basic work. Taking Vargasiella only World Checklist of Selected Plant Families is really required, but I am not suggesting than you waste time editing out the other two. I use Catol-Hassler and Tropicos as my two main alternatives. Of course, not all other authorities will follow WCSP, but it is rarer than it appears. However, just have a look at Muscari and Cupressus where we have two knowledgeable editors who beg to differ from Kew and this requires notes on the pages, as well as sometimes two name pages for the same taxon. WS can not take sides when there are two widely held accepted and strong taxonomic opinions. Best greetings, hope this helps and I also hope an English post is OK. Andyboorman (talk) 10:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear Andy, could you please create the species Vargasiella peruviana as example according to your ideas. Best. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 20:25, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear Orchi. Done. It is much simplified in syntax due to improvements in the templates. Hope this helps. Andyboorman (talk) 21:12, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear Andy, I have adapted some of my personal templates according to your suggestions. With regards. Orchi (talk) 17:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Unidentified

In the classification of illustrations, I find here two species of orchids of which I cannot find references. I am sending it to you in case you have the opportunity to classify them. Greetings.--MILEPRI (talk) 14:16, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@MILEPRI: The book labels them as Cynosorchis violacea and Cynosorchis sororia. The genus is a synonym of Cynorkis. Hope this helps Andyboorman (talk) 16:56, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Ya ha sido resuelto. Gracias.--MILEPRI (talk) 17:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

...Thanks! & Gracias! Orchi (talk) 22:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Diuris decrementa oder decrementum?

Hallo Orchi, wir haben in Wikispecies sowohl Diuris decrementa als auch Diuris decrementum. Da ansonsten die Artnamen von Diuris meist auf -a enden, ist der Gattungsname wohl feminin. Die Seite mit der maskulinen Endung sollte daher auf den richtigen Namen weiterleiten. Viele Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Orchi and @Thiotrix:. In my opinion WCSP is incorrect on this epithet. See IPNI]. All the best Andyboorman (talk) 18:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Hallo Thiotrix, hello Andy. Danke & thanks. Ich werde eine Weiterlatung zu Diuris decrementa machen. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

P.S. ...maybe Andy can report to Rafael.

Himatonglossum

Himantoglossum Bretten

Hier noch die Koordinaten für google earth: 49.03468167446287, 8.698154303228677 Die Pflanzen hatten sich auch auf die weiter südlich gelegene Wiese ausgebreitet, aber dort wurden die Bäume auch gefällt. Der ewige Fortschritt halt. Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

Merry Christmas and all the best for a Happy New Year.

Take care Andyboorman (talk) 13:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Weihnachtsgrüße

Hallo Orchi, etwas spät, aber besser als nie. Ich wünsche dir auch ein besinnliches Weihnachtsfest mit der Familie und alles Gute für 2022. Ich hatte überlegt sogar anzurufen, war mir dann aber unsicher. Ich bin in letzter Zeit mal wieder sehr untätig hier, so wie das bei mir halt so ist. Mal mehr und wieder mal weniger bei den Wikis. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:55, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Grüße

Hallo Orchi, herzlichen Dank für deine netten Weihnachtsgrüße. Ich wünsche dir auch einen frohen Jahreswechsel, und ein gutes und vor allem gesundes Neues Jahr 2022. Viele Grüße von --Thiotrix (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Specifying author abbreviations within IPNI templates

Hallo Orchi! Just out of curiosity, what was your reason to add the "O.F.Müll." author abbreviation to the "IPNI standard form" template in the Otto Friedrich Müller page? The template fetches the abbreviation directly from Wikidata (i.e. Q461381), and as far as I know simply adding a "clean" {{IPNI standard form}} template without the abbreviation is enough? Please note that this os not meant as any form of criticism: I just wonder why you did it. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC).

@Tommy Kronkvist:

Hello Tommy Kronkvist,

I have always used the path, that you indicate so far. (...very time saving).

Two experts, User:RLJ and User:Thiotrix used the way like in Otto Friedrich Müller.

I just imitated good specialists....  ;-) Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

I see. There is a potential problem with this method, even though I'll admit it would only arise in very rare occasions. Most often the IPNI standard forms never change, but it does happen from time to time. Take for example the American botanist Merritt Lyndon Fernald. His author abbreviation used to be Fern., but today it has changed to Fernald. Another perhaps more common case is when female authors change their surname due to marriage.

All of these abbreviation changes can easily be corrected in Wikidata, for example from Fern. to Fernald. It only takes one edit in Wikidata, and all our templates that use {{IPNI standard form}} without any parameter would then be automatically updated to reflect the new Wikidata information. However, if instead we add the parameter to the template and write {{IPNI standard form|Fern.}} then our page will disregard the Wikidata information and still say Fern., which of course would be wrong. In order to fix that we would have to manually edit the author page. There is a big risk that we might miss or forget to do that, since there are only approximately 200–250 active users here at Wikispecies (in comparison to ≈23,000 active users at Wikidata).

Again, I'm not saying that this is a big problem, but it may occasionally lead to incorrect information on our author pages. Having said that, I wish to add that I hold both RLJ's and Thiotrix's opinions in very high regard, since they are both knowledgeable and very experienced Wikispecies users. After all they registered their Wikimedia accounts only one year after you and me, so they've been here for a long time. ;-) –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:25, 9 January 2022 (UTC).

Hello Orchi and Tommy Kronkvist, for a long time I used the IPNI template without any addition. But last week, I recognized, that User RLJ added the abbreviaton on all author pages I had edited, and I supposed that it should be like that. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Tommy Kronkvist:, @Thiotrix:, @RLJ:

Good day, Thiotrix, RLJ and Tommy Kronkvist,

...what shall we do?? Regards und beste Grüße. Orchi (talk) 11:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello altogether! I think the IPNI standard form is an essential information, and as such it should be on Wikispecies in the article in explicit form, working independently from any externals. {{IPNI standard form}} works only if the article is linked to the correct wikidata object. If it is not, or if the property item IPNI author ID would be deleted, or whatever, we have nothing. As far as I know it is rather unique at the moment that essential Wikispecies content is provided by a link to Wikidata.

The standard form is the most stable item on the author pages, it identifies Merritt Lyndon Fernald, M.L. Fernald, Merritt L. Fernald, M. L. Fernald etc. as well. "Fern." was often used for M.L. Fernald in older literature, but in Brummitt & Powell 1992, Authors of Plant Names, the starting point for standardization of author names (and already before, e.g. in Flora Europaea and the first volumes of Flora of North America), "Fernald" was chosen as standard form, and "Fern." as abbreviation of Fernandes. Changes of the standard form rarely occur, especially in younger entries. It is only a minority of the 23,000 users caring about biological data, and it is not unlikely that someone of us would detect the change.

I don't have any problem with unique fetching from Wikidata, such as {{IPNI standard form|{{Subst:#property:P428}}}} as well as with {{Authority control}} and similar. Best wishes --RLJ (talk) 01:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Orchadian

Hi Orchi and @Badlydrawnboy22: You maybe interested to note that the Orchadian is available to read on BHL, for example Orchadian 14(8): Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Dear Andy, thank you very much for this good information!! Best regards. Orchi (talk) 19:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Andyboorman:, thanks for the hint!@ The Australian Orchid Review is also available now. Unfortunately both under cc-by-nc-sa, so we can not really use it. Also the quality is rather low. However, good enough for linking to articles or pages. Best wishes Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 20:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Thrixspermum

Hallo @Orchi:, vielen, vielen Dank für das Erstellen der einzelnen Seiten in der Gattung! Ich mache mich dann demnächst daran sie weiter zu füllen. Ich brauche aber noch einiges an Literatur und es gibt ja noch so viele weitere Baustellen... Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 16:49, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

....nach dem Rohbau kommt Deine Veredelung. ;-) Viele Grüße. Orchi (talk) 17:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Ich werde mein Bestes geben. Könnte etwas dauern. Ich wollte alphabetisch vorgehen. Bin bei Luisia eigentlich fertig und könnte eigentlich bei A wieder anfangen... Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Dendrophylax lindenii

Hier der Artikel: https://bioone.org/journals/florida-entomologist/volume-102/issue-4/024.102.0401/Pollinia-Removal-and-Suspected-Pollination-of-the-Endangered-Ghost-Orchid/10.1653/024.102.0401.full Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Noch einer: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49387-4

....vielen Dank und Grüße. Orchi (talk) 20:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Verbreitungsdaten POWO

Hi @Orchi: Ab 01. November sollen in POWO die Verbreitungsdaten verfügbar sein. Hoffen wir es mal... Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 20:56, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Guten Abend Badlydrawnboy22, danke für Deine Anfragen in KEW. Ich bin gespannt, ob die Daten von "Brummitt, R.K. 2001. TDWG – World Geographical Scheme for Recording Plant Distributions, 2nd Edition" wieder zu Verfügung stehen werden. Grüße. Orchi (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Anruf

Hallo @Orchi, ich war beim Treffen der Orchideenfreunde Jena und konnte nicht ans Telefon gehen. Ruf doch gerne morgen an. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 20:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Dimorphorchis

Hallo @Orchi, ich habe in Dimorphorchis einiges umgearbeitet. POWO ist informiert und wird entsprechend upgedated, dies könnte aber etwas dauern. Einige der neuen Seiten sind noch nicht ganz vollständig. Ich versuche dran zu denken und sie bei Gelegenheit abzuschließen. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 22:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Typus Art

Hallo @Orchi, ich glaube du hast mal erwähnt, dass du ein Temnplat für eine Typus-Art haben wolltest und es sollte anders sein als tysp. Ich habe typsp erstellt und mich an dem Templat moty orientiert. Blöd nur, dass es keinen deutschen Wikipedia-Artikel dazu gibt. Gruß Badlydrawnboy22 (talk) 12:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)