PeterR

There are archives of this talk page:
Archive 2008: 1, 2		Archive 2009
Archive 2010		Archive 2011
Archive 2012		Archive 2013
Archive 2014		Archive 2015
Archive 2016		Archive 2017–2019
Archive 2020		Archive 2021
The archives are searchable:

Enypia

Hello PeterR. I've recently added a list of species + author and year of publication to Enypia (Geometridae). Before my edit, the page did not list any species or author. Since you specialize in Lepidoptera, could you please have a quick look and check whether the information I added is correct and complete? Also, do you have access to Hulst's publication? I couldn't find out whether Enypia perangulata Hulst, 1896 or Enypia venata (Grote, 1883) [= Cleora venata Grote, 1883] is the type species. Thank you, and best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC).

Sofar I could find I have add the species with details in Enypia. PeterR (talk) 09:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC).

Mimia phydile (sic)

Peter,

The correct original spelling of this species name is actually phidyle not phydile. You can see the OD in Biodiversity Heritage Library, which is always worth checking before you create a page here.

Could you make the appropriate changes please?

Thanks, Alan — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Accassidy (talk • contribs) 11:36, 10 June 2021.

Alan,

I had the information from Delgado-Botello, F. & Vargas, J.I. 2016. They described a new subspecies Mimia phydile tatamaensis. Nobody had add Minia Phidyle, so I didn't check if the species name was good. PeterR (talk) 11:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Are they entomologists?

Hi Peter. In June you created pages for the three authors Amy-Jayne Dutton, Liza Fowler and Natasha Stevens, all based in Jamestown, Saint Helena. You didn't add scientific disciplines for any of them, but I guess that they are entomologists? I would like to create Wikidata pages for each one of the authors, but first I must know their profession. (You don't need to update the author pages, if you don't want to. You can answer me here, and I'll take care of the details.)
Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:55, 2 August 2021 (UTC).

Tommy, I forget sometimes to create defaultsort etc. I have now done it.PeterR (talk) 07:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I have now created the Wikidata items for Dutton (Q107771928), Fowler (Q107771668) and Stevens (Q107772305), and added the "Authority control" template to their Wikispecies pages. This means that when information about their relations to universities, libraries, museums and databases is added to Wikidata, it will also automatically be shown here on their Wikispecies pages. (In other words, their links to BHL, WorldCat, IPNI, GND, ZooBank, ISNI, etc.) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC).

Nama

Hello. The page for Nama refers to a plant genus. I suggest that if you have an accepted zoological genus then you rename it as per consensus. Andyboorman (talk) 12:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Apologies taxon page has been renamed. Thanks. Andyboorman (talk) 12:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

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

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

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

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

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

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Mikhailov & Reshetnikov publication date

Just so you know, I created the template as "Mikhailov & Reshetnikov, 2022" because it has "Published 11 January 2022" online, despite the issue being for "October 2021". I don't believe that particular article was online at all last year. Monster Iestyn (talk) 17:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC).

You have to look for issue date Entomological Review, 2021 101(7): 979–991. The series 101 are from 2021. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeterR (talk • contribs) 08:30, 16 January 2022.

Yes, I saw the issue date, but with journals published online those issue dates can be misleading sometimes I find... I'll have to ask around how the publication dates even work for that journal at some point, they have confused me before and could affect publication dates or years for a couple of other references from that journal. It's a pity that almost nobody there registers their articles on ZooBank for some reason. (Only seven articles are linked to the series' ZooBank ID even now.) Monster Iestyn (talk) 14:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC).

I only publish after original bulletins. Entomological Review is a translation in english from Russian journals. PeterR (talk) 15:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm aware, though usually the translated articles have a notice with "Original Russian Text @ authors, year ... published in Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, [details]". But some of the articles in Entomological Review do not, which could mean they are original articles for the English version? Monster Iestyn (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Sometimes they publish only in english. See Entomological Review , 2018, vol. 98, No. 1, pp. 76-113. PeterR (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Grishin, Janzen & Hallwachs, 2014

Could you look into this template, Peter, and see if you can get it working?

Template:Grishin, Janzen & Hallwachs, 2014

Thanks — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Accassidy (talk • contribs) 11:36, 22 January 2022.

Done. PeterR (talk) 11:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Zaragoza-Caballero et al., 2021

Just letting you know, the page "Temnaspis chamelensis" you created should be Tenaspis chamelensis, for Tenaspis LeConte, 1881 in Lampyridae. Temnaspis Lacordaire, 1845 is an unrelated genus in another family (Megalopodidae) that unfortunately has almost the same name. (I'm basing this information on this version of the article uploaded to ResearchGate). Monster Iestyn (talk) 15:54, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Done PeterR (talk) 16:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Jane Costa

Hello, just wondering, where did "von Sydow" come from exactly? According to her website her full name is "Jane Margaret Costa de Frontin Werneck", which is also the name that Jane herself edited the page as back in 2018. Monster Iestyn (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah wait, sorry, I see "von Sydow" on her website too so it might be one of her other names, but it doesn't seem to be the full name she prefers either way. Monster Iestyn (talk) 14:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Coeliades lorenzo

Peter, Have you got a web link or a full title etc. for this reference? Henning et al., 1997 Thanks. AlanHenning et al., 1997 — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Accassidy (talk • contribs) 21:24, 28 April 2022.

Wunderlich templates

Hello PeterR. Currently the two templates {{Wunderlich, 2008b}} and {{Wunderlich, 2008c}} which you created last year are marked for deletion. The user who marked them for deletion claims that the "References doesn't exist". Do you perhaps have a link similar to the actual publications, so that we can keep them instead of deleting them? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC).

Tommy See [1] PeterR (talk)

Thank you. The templates was unused (on Wikispecies) and has now been merged with {{Wunderlich, 2008a}}.Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:47, 10 May 2022 (UTC).

Tommy, I'm now missing the pictures from the spiders. How can we fix it now? PeterR (talk) 12:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

What pictures? The templates did not include any pictures (they never do). Both templates only included 2 links, namely to the Jörg Wunderlich and Beiträge zur Araneologie pages here at Wikispecies. They did not include any links to external pages outside of Wikispecies. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC).

Tommy, I had made two reference templates 2008a and 2008b. 2008a described all the new families, species etc. and 2008b are the picturess from the new species etc. PeterR (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘ No, unfortunately that is not correct. Your original version of the "Wunderlich, 2008a" template can be seen here, including the timestamp "15 March 2021, at 12:34) by PeterR" which marks the time you created it:

• Template Wunderlich, 2008a: https://species.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=Template%3AWunderlich%2C+2008a&timestamp=20210315123458

As you can see it does not include any information about the families and species. Here is a copy of the same text which may be easier to read:

* Wunderlich, J. 2008a. Descriptions of fossil spider (Araneae) taxa mainly in Baltic amber, as well as on certain related extant taxa. Beiträge zur Araneologie 5: 44-139. Reference page.
** Find all Wikispecies pages which cite this reference.
Category:Reference templates

The Wunderlich, 2008b template was deleted earlier today by administrator @Neferkheperre. As usual, all deletions can be seen in the Deletion log. The only differences between the 2008a, 2008b, and 2008c templates was the page numbers (a: 44–139, b: 803–804, c: 813–818) which I have now instead all added to the merged {{Wunderlich, 2008a}} template.

Please note that we normally do not add pictures to reference templates. You have created a total of 42,515 templates here at Wikispecies, and I don't think you have added pictures to any of them. We only add pictures to taxon pages and author pages.

I will be happy to help with any further detais, but unfortunately that will have to wait until tomorrow. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC).

Author Padron

I suspect these two names are same person. They are in your specialty; Pablo Sebastián Padrón and Pablo Sebastián Padrón Martínez. Neferkheperre (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC).

I have moved all to Pablo Sebastián Padrón Martínez and Pablo Sebastián Padrón Martínez taxa. PeterR (talk) 13:32, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

New taxon author pages

Why do you sometimes not add categories or sortkeys to new taxon author pages you create, such as Giovanni Bianco and Tom Schneider? Monster Iestyn (talk) 14:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC).

Sometimes I forget it and sometimes I do it afterwards. PeterR (talk) 14:09, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I wondered if you meant to leave them out for some reason, but obviously that is not the case. Thank you for explaining. I'll fix the pages if that happens again in future, if I see they're missing categories etc. Monster Iestyn (talk) 15:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

PeterR, it appears to me that you forget these categories or sortkeys quite a lot still, even after I brought this to your attention over a year ago. I already linked it in the Village Pump recently, but here is a link that may help you find pages you forgot to add categories or sortkeys to:

• Special:Search/-insource:"Category" hastemplate:"Taxa authored"

This will search for all taxon author pages that have the {{Taxa authored}} template but no categories. Monster Iestyn (talk) 01:01, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Mirinae

Hello PeterR. I recently looked at the Mirinae page, because it was edited by an unknown user (the unknown user then reverted the edit himself). The page was created in 2008 and has been edited several times by many users. It has always listed "Mirinae Carvalho, 1959" as the author and year of publication. However almost all online sources I can find instead claims that it should be "Mirinae Hahn, 1833". This includes ITIS, Fossilworks, Dyntaxa, BioLib, etc. (You can use Q6018203 at Wikidata for more identifiers and references: they all list Hahn, 1833 or no author.)

The only online reference that mentions "Carvalho, 1959" that I can find is this one by Randall Tobias Schuh (American Museum of Natural History, 2013). That page also lists a lot of other authors and publications for this taxon name: all of them newer than 1959.

There is a {{Carvalho, 1959}} link to a reference template on the Wikispecies Mirinae page that was added in 2020 by our administrator Neferkheperre, but the template itself was never created so it has always been a red link. Done. PeterR (talk) 07:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I know that you usually have access to very good literature in regards to entomology. Do you (or @Neferkheperre) perhaps have access to any good references to verify the currently most up-to-date author name and year of publication for this subfamily?
Thanks beforehand. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC).

There are a lot of fake templates under ===Primary references===. PeterR (talk) 07:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I know, but that's not the main issue here. I think it is very strange that 99% of the online references list Hahn as the author instead of Carvalho.

Thanks for creating the "Carvalho, 1959" reference template! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC).

Hahn, 1833 would be the actual author, using ICZN Code Article 36.1; „A name established for a taxon at any rank in the family group is deemed to have been simultaneously established for nominal taxa at all other ranks in the family group; all these taxa have the same type genus, and their names are formed from the stem of the name of the type genus [Art. 29.3] with appropriate change of suffix [Art. 34.1]. The name has the same authorship and date at every rank.“ Even though Carvalho did establish Mirinae, he would at most be noted as nom. transl. One problem is that very many authors of articles do not make proper note of the Principal of Coordination, especially when it comes to tribes, so correct attribution may be hard to come by. Neferkheperre (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Cyrtogrammomma momma

Hello, are you sure about the name of that species? because I just came across {{Gonzalez-Filho et al., 2022}} and the new species is named "Cyrtogrammomma frevo". This is confirmed by ZooBank or by World Spider Catalog. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2023 (UTC).

I have make a new one for frevo and I delete momma. It was a mistake. PeterR (talk) 09:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Honduran entomologists

Hello PeterR. You have created the two pages Mildred Paola Márquez Godoy (Honduran entomologist, born 1988) and Mildred Marquez (Honduran entomologist). Do ou know if they are the same person, perhaps? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC).

They have the same address. So I think they are the same persons. PeterR (talk) 10:04, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tommy Kronkvist @PeterR I think they are the same person too: Mildred Marquez has email starting with "mildredpmarquez", which could be Mildred P. [= Paola] Marquez, and I found a page for Mildred Paola Márquez Godoy [2] which also gives the same email address as Mildred Marquez's. Monster Iestyn (talk) 20:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Just a note, I think these can be merged, the one who created the insecta-web can also be contacted at facebook, under name Mii Lii. I'm risking sharing but I know her personally we worked together in projects in honduras 2011,2012. Sjl197 (talk) 11:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Chionodes lector vs. Chionodes lictor

Hi! I think one of those spellings is not correct. Same source, both created by you. Can you have a look? --Succu (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I have had a look, but both species assist. See Google. PeterR (talk) 07:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate pages

Hello PeterR, during the last years you have created hundreds of duplicate pages (see User:MatSuBot/Duplicates). I am now working to redirect the duplicates (mostly with subgenus in the title) to the Wikispecies standard form of binominal title (or trinomen for subspecies). But I noticed that you still continue to create duplicates, e.g. Agrypnus herczigi, although Agrypnus (Colaulon) herczigi already exists. Please just move Agrypnus (Colaulon) herczigi to Agrypnus herczigi and do not copy the content to a new page! Thank you, and kind regards, Thiotrix (talk) 09:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC).

I shell try to do that. PeterR (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Thenpea penthea

Hi, you may see i've made some edits within butterflies, but notably i merged the best from Adelotypa penthea into Thenpea penthea. That latter seems to be the valid combination, and it was mostly your earlier edits on Adelotypa penthea that got merged in. Obviously if you think the synonym is wrong etc, lets talk, but otherwise please check and then perhaps removed the outdated Adelotypa penthea content such as a redirect. Else, there are three subspecies listed in both files - i don't think any remain valid but maybe so. Sjl197 (talk) 12:01, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

For above under Adelotypa, that has untidy links to the 'penthea' files that i'm notifying about. But further, also i just found A. trinitatis needs to be linked with Pachythone conspersa, again i've part done it, but for example the "Adelotypa trinitatis" file could become a redirect if you think that's right. Again notice there are subspecies.

[note, several others listed after my wording "Transferred to other genera" were added back in by another user after your creation - not added back by me - i'm trying to clear up what got transfered elsewhere!, and i'm sorry to leave some bits] Sjl197 (talk) 13:00, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

If you have original papers you can change it. Some species are chang after years I add them. I have a lot of papers but not all. PeterR (talk) 07:19, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Pseudotaphoxenus ghilarovi

Hi, Peter, Why are you suppose that the author is Alla B. Vereshchagina? Why did you add additional "h"? Are you sure that this is original spelling? Hunu (talk) 11:44, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I have search on internet and the only Vereschagina or Vereshchagina I found is Alla Borisovna Vereshchagina. If this is wrong You can change it in the good name.PeterR (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

You was wrong. Alla Borisovna Vereshchagina is specialist in Aphidoidea. The author is Tatiana Nikolaevna Vereschagina. And latin spelling of her family name is Vereschagina. [3] Hunu (talk) 12:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

I made a few alterations on T.N. Vereschagina from available sources at hands. Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I can't find on internet publications from her. Can you tell me in what for bulletin she has published this species?PeterR (talk) 14:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

V.F. Bakhvalov

Hi Peter, I see this creation on Wikispecies and I am pretty sure that this author is Viktor Fedorovitch Bakhvalov (see Wikidata). In fact I found him on this ResearchGate page trying to found his russian name (Бахвалов, В. Ф. = V.F. Bakhvalov). Maybe you can rename the Wikispecies page... up to you. Thank you so much in advance :-) Givet (talk) 07:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

By the way a species describeb by him is Zygiella kirgisica... — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Givet (talk • contribs) 07:43, 7 September 2023.

Thanks for your help. I have made all the reference templates for Viktor Fedorovitch Bakhvalov so far I know. I cant add the full species because they are written in Russian. Maybe you can translate those bulletins. If you have more full names you can inform me. PeterR (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned authors

Hi Peter. You've recently added A LOT of authors, but they are just names without any content. No one knows whether they are taxonomist or just zoologists without any described taxa. Please, when you add an author, add also at least one taxonomic article or one described taxon. Otherwise the author will be considered an ORPHANED AUTHOOR and eventually will be DELETED! Mariusm (talk) 05:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC).

Marius: This are authors who died, but I don't know of they have published something. Its all in Russian and a little summery in English. PeterR (talk) 06:51, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Please don't add such questionable authors anymore! Mariusm (talk) 07:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

​I personally think that it's okay to add them, but only if they have published work that is directly relevant to taxonomy, systematics or nomenclature of a particular taxon or taxon name. In my opinion, it's not strictly necessary that they have also authored any taxon names. However, if they haven't (re)described a taxon, it's very important to not add the [[Category:Taxon authorities]] category to their author pages, and also not add the {{Taxa authored}} section.

Please see Who can be considered a Taxon Authority? and Candidates for speedy deletion in the Village Pump archives for old discussions about this. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:49, 14 September 2023 (UTC).

I could look at these authors, since a lot of Russian and other East European authors were still not incorporated in the WS. Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:11, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Revista de Sciencias

Hello Peter! Do you know whether the journal "Revista de Sciencias" in Template:Mello-Leitão, 1920 is the same as the "Brotéria: revista de sciencias naturaes" mentioned in ISSN 0871-0481? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC).

I only know that the journal "Revista de Sciencias" is (was) a Brazilian journal. I get these journals via NMBE World spider catalogue. As a member I can get all journals.PeterR (talk) 13:33, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC).

This is a separate title: Revista de sciências : orgão da Sociedade Brasileira de Sciências / Rio de Janeiro : Briguiet 4.1920 - 6.1922; OCLC number: 183332518. Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Full author names in type genus/species

I've noticed for a while now that you've been writing author names in full for "Type genus" or "Type species". For example:

Type genus: Archaeoluprops Maxim Vital’evich Nabozhenko, Evgeny Eduardovich Perkovsky & Vitaliy Yurievich Nazarenko, 2023 (in Archaeolupropini)

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Maxim Vital’evich Nabozhenko, Evgeny Eduardovich Perkovsky & Vitaliy Yurievich Nazarenko, 2023 (in Archaeoluprops)

Can I ask why you're doing this? Or if this is an accident and you didn't mean to do this? Monster Iestyn (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

You can ask me. I have done this because I know immidiately who the write person it is. Special the chinese authors etc.PeterR (talk) 07:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I get that having full names is important, but why not just use the {{A}} template for the type genus or species too, like you do for the authors above them on the page?

For instance, instead of:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Maxim Vital’evich Nabozhenko, Evgeny Eduardovich Perkovsky & Vitaliy Yurievich Nazarenko, 2023.

You can do this:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:26, 21 October 2023 (UTC).

I could do this but thats no done by authors type species. Only by species and synonymy.PeterR (talk) 13:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean by this? Are you talking about the small caps font, as in how "Nabozhenko" appears as "Nabozhenko"? Otherwise... when I see a type species in an scientific publication, the names of the authors there are never given in full like you write them, so it actually looks very strange to me when they are written in full on Wikispecies. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:54, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Thats not true. I have learn it to do this way and not "Nabozhenko"?. I do this about many years, but later some people did it this way "Nabozhenko"?. You can't make a link to the write person. The changes some people made create a bigger chaos. Nothing is correct. I have a lot work to update the publications.PeterR (talk) 14:03, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't really know what to say to that, sorry, I haven't been editing Wikispecies as long as you. I understand Stho002's changes made a huge mess that still needs to be cleaned up even now (I still see his work when I edit pages for species from New Zealand), but I don't think anyone on Wikispecies uses his format anymore. As far as I can see though, most people on Wikispecies these days use {{A}} or {{Aut}} for author names, even in type species and type genus. Again, full names just look wrong in taxon authorities to me, even for writing type species. In my examples they also make the authorities look too long, because of the full names of the three Russian or Ukrainian authors together. Monster Iestyn (talk) 16:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

┌──────────┘ I agree. As @Monster Iestyn says above, I think that:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023

or:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023

is a lot better than PeterR's version, which I think is too long:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Maxim Vital’evich Nabozhenko, Evgeny Eduardovich Perkovsky & Vitaliy Yurievich Nazarenko, 2023

However, if the "long" version is used, it should be formatted as:

Archaeoluprops Nabozhenko, Perkovsky & Nazarenko, 2023: 585

Type species: Archaeoluprops groehni Maxim Vital’evich Nabozhenko, Evgeny Eduardovich Perkovsky & Vitaliy Yurievich Nazarenko, 2023

Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC).

Tommy, I prefer the last solotion.PeterR (talk) 07:46, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I recommend to add initials instead of full names, since some surnames Nazarenko or more illustrative case Ivanov is very widespread, and could be used by different persons. IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Vladimir M. Gnezdilov

Hello Peter, do you remember where you found the full name of Vladimir Michaylovich Gnezdilov? In Vorontsov's Who's who in Biodiversity Sciences, p. 164, his middle name is spelled "Mikhaylovich". Korg (talk) 13:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC).

Korg, the Russian names is a problem. Sometimes it is Vladimir Michaylovich Gnezdilov or Vladimir Mikhaylovich Gnezdilov. PeterR (talk) 12:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps Anna Pavlova (i.e. user @IFPNI Staff) have more information? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2023 (UTC).

A lot of Russian and other names I have ask them per e-mail. I have now an other provider. PeterR (talk) 13:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

The second name Mikhailovich [preferred modern spelling] or Michaylovich are just variants. I recommend to use ISO 9/1995 Standard of transliteration of Russian and other Cyrillic names: [4]. Therefore, Mikhailovich or permissible variant Mikhajlovich is preferable. Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Please abolish “Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka” and merge it with “Amritpal Singh Kaleka”

Hi Peter. “Amritpal Singh Kaleka” that you created on 5/26/2020 and “Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka” that you created on 6/17/2020 are the same person. The author's name of his article on the web is spelled three ways: "Amritpal Singh Kaleka", "Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka" or "APS Kaleka". If you search on "https://www.researchgate.net/topics", there are countless articles by "Amritpal Singh Kaleka" and "APS Kaleka" and they use the same icon. But "Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka" has no icon photo and there are only 4 articles. Please abolish “Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka” and merge it with “Amritpal Singh Kaleka”. The evidence is that the author names of the two linked documents in the "publications" section of the "Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka" page are "Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka" and "Amritpal Singh Kaleka" and the departments to which they belong are the same. Nmspec (talk) 13:57, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I shall do it, but is Singh a part of the back name? I see Singh not as a first name. PeterR (talk) 15:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't know how the name is formed in India. The woman who co-authored the article uses a four-word name, and "Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka" may have been his official name in India, but he was trying to make it shorter to match Western style, I think. I believe that the name "Singh", which is often heard among Indians, is part of his surname, but since he also likes to use "Aps Kaleka" to sign his papers, when he contacts Westerners, I think he is requesting that "Kaleka" be treated as a surname. Nmspec (talk) 03:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@PeterR @Nmspec See also his profiles at Google Scholar and ResearchGate. Both of them use the form "APS Kaleka", so I agree that "Kaleka" appears to be his surname. Monster Iestyn (talk) 04:24, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I think that "Aps Kaleka" is just a page name decided by the summary site, as the signature on the linked article of a site with the title "Aps Kaleka" is often "Amritpal Singh Kaleka". I believe this is the internationally accepted representation of "Aps Kaleka", which consists of a first name and a sirname format. Even if the page name on Wikispecies is unified with "Aps Kaleka", the full name and "Kaleka, A.P.S." and "Kaleka, A.S." also exist in the citation specification of papers. Since we cannot ignore these and use "Kaleka, Aps" or "Kaleka, A." in the {publications} field, we need a disclaimer at the beginning of the page. I think it should be unified around "Amritpal Singh Kaleka", which is often used in papers, rather than "Aps Kaleka", which is used by summary sites. Nmspec (talk) 11:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Done PeterR (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

“Amrit Pal Singh Kaleka” has been changed to #redirect.

Monster Iestyn 's proposal was limited to the surname. I mistakenly thought it was the entire name. I am sorry.

The author's abbreviated name on a recent article co-authored with Dr. Bali is "Copyright: © Bali & Kaleka 2023." and "Citation: Bali, G.P.K. & A.S. Kaleka (2023)....". Nmspec (talk) 13:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Annawaty Annawaty

Is there any rule that we need to have last name for an author cause Annawaty is only comprised of one word and common in Indonesian name? I also see that you remove category new species 2015. Is there any reason? Agus Damanik (talk) 02:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Agus Damanik: The forms "Annawaty Annawaty" and "A. Annawaty" seems to be fairly common for this author. For example he is mentioned as "A Annawaty" in ORCID 0000-0003-0112-7313, and that information was added there by A Annawaty himself. Also, the combination "Annawaty Annawaty" is frequently used in publications, see for example the three papers DOI: 10.1016/j.hjb.2016.04.001, DOI: 10.22487/25411969.2019.V8.I2.13545, and DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2019.1705930

–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 03:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC).

Thanks Tommy PeterR (talk) 08:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for this source. Agus Damanik (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Agus Damanik @Tommy Kronkvist It's not consistent whether she uses "Annawaty" or "Annawaty Annawaty" from what I can see; in her Google Scholar profile she is "Annawaty" and in her ResearchGate profile she is "Annawaty Annawaty". In the 2015 Zootaxa co-authored by her, she is "Annawaty" (see preview PDF; though on the abstract online her name is given as "Annawaty Annawaty" instead, maybe in error?), but in other articles such as those Tommy linked she has the doubled name.

I suspect "Annawaty" is her actual full name (and a mononym) and "Annawaty Annawaty" is used when a first name and last name is expected in some journals? But I'm just guessing. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

You're wrong again. PeterR (talk) 13:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

KRATOCHVÍL

@PeterR: Hi Peter, Just saw in recent changes you were annotating Pholcid spiders. You've linked one to describer Kratochvíl, linking him to "Jan Kratochvíl". I think instead you might need a different person - "Josef Kratochvíl" [5] Sjl197 (talk) 14:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Indead it is Josef. I look in the original bulletin. I have change it all. PeterR (talk) 14:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Cheers, we should have taxonomists all adopt unique names as if actor's stage names! Sjl197 (talk) 15:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Paul / Pablo Köhler

There seem to be two pages for this lepidopterist: Paul Emil Köhler and Paul Köhler

Would be great to have the two pages merged to enable merging of the respective wikidata entries. Thank you! SimonEUV (talk) 08:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Done. PeterR (talk) 15:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Rothschildia prionia

Hello. I'm brazilian and don't speak English. So... forgive my mistakes. I photographed male and female of Rothschildia prionia on my brother's farm, here in Bahia, Brazil. But didn't find any information about this species... Can you indicate some references about this moth? Tks. André Koehne (talk) 03:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC). I have this species updated sofar I know. PeterR (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)