RedGKS
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! I will check papers on this and adjust accordingly if I find sources to support what you are saying. Koumz (talk) 13:38, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- This 2004 paper shows Hydrophiinae as containing the Australasian terrestrial venomous elapids as well as the sea snakes. None of your secondary sources give a subfamily. Whether Oxyuranus is in Elapidae is not in question; which subfamily is the question.
- I don't really oppose you changing it, but if I were going to make that change, I would want to do it on the basis of primary papers rather than the secondary sources you've shown (BTW, ITIS is not considered a strong source here because it is often badly out of date.) Koumz (talk) 14:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- A more recent paper (2008) also showing Hydrophiinae as containing the terrestrial elapids. I will continue hunting for papers. I have seen one, I think, which puts Oxyuranus in a new subfamily Nototechinae, so that also needs investigation. I don't have an opinion on this myself. I just want WS to follow the best and most recent papers. Koumz (talk) 14:14, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- The 2008 paper above also refers to Oxyuraninae, so that also needs to be investigated in detail to see how that has been treated most recently. Koumz (talk) 14:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I've made a few formatting adjustments to the pages you are creating. Keep up the good work and learn as you go! Koumz (talk) 14:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- Adding interwikis to your pages (as I just did at Dendroaspis jamesoni) is a good practice too. Koumz (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I've made a few formatting adjustments to the pages you are creating. Keep up the good work and learn as you go! Koumz (talk) 14:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- The 2008 paper above also refers to Oxyuraninae, so that also needs to be investigated in detail to see how that has been treated most recently. Koumz (talk) 14:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- A more recent paper (2008) also showing Hydrophiinae as containing the terrestrial elapids. I will continue hunting for papers. I have seen one, I think, which puts Oxyuranus in a new subfamily Nototechinae, so that also needs investigation. I don't have an opinion on this myself. I just want WS to follow the best and most recent papers. Koumz (talk) 14:14, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
- I don't really oppose you changing it, but if I were going to make that change, I would want to do it on the basis of primary papers rather than the secondary sources you've shown (BTW, ITIS is not considered a strong source here because it is often badly out of date.) Koumz (talk) 14:05, 16 February 2012 (UTC)