Wikispecies:Village Pump

Welcome to the village pump of Wikispecies.

This page is a place to ask questions or discuss the project. If you need an admin, please see the Administrators' Noticeboard. If you need to solicit feedback, see Request for Comment. Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~ or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar). Use the Wikispecies IRC channel for real-time chat.

If you're going to critique the work of fellow editors (blatant vandals excepted) in your post on this page, you should notify them, either by mentioning them with a {{Reply to}} template, or with a post on their talk page.

If you insert links to Wikipedia pages in your comments, don't forget the leading colon (:) before the wiki language code (including when you reference a remote user page instead of using a local signature), otherwise it will generate spurious interwiki links collected in the sidebar instead of in the expected location within the discussion. Thanks.

Village pump in other languages:

• Chinese - 中文
• Czech - česky
• Finnish - Suomi
• French - Français
• Hungarian - Magyar
• Hindi - हिन्दी
• Italian - Italiano
• Korean - 한국어
• Nepali - नेपाली
• Russian - Русский
• Tamil - தமிழ்
• Ukrainian - Українська
• Vietnamese - Tiếng Việt

Archives
1	(2004-09-21/2005-01-05)	2	(2005-01-05/2005-08-23)
3	(2005-08-24/2005-12-31)	4	(2006-01-01/2005-05-31)
5	(2006-06-01/2006-12-16)	6	(2006-12-17/2006-12-31)
7	(2007-01-01/2007-02-28)	8	(2007-03-01/2007-04-30)
9	(2007-05-01/2007-08-31)	10	(2007-09-01/2007-10-31)
11	(2007-11-01/2007-12-31)	12	(2008-01-01/2008-02-28)
13	(2008-03-01/2008-04-28)	14	(2008-04-29/2008-06-30)
15	(2008-07-01/2008-09-30)	16	(2008-10-01/2008-12-25)
17	(2008-12-26/2009-02-28)	18	(2009-03-01/2009-06-30)
19	(2009-07-01/2009-12-31)	20	(2010-01-01/2010-06-30)
21	(2010-07-01/2010-12-31)	22	(2011-01-01/2011-06-30)
23	(2011-07-01/2011-12-31)	24	(2012-01-01/2012-12-31)
25	(2013-01-01/2013-12-31)	26	(2014-01-01/2014-12-31)
27	(2015-01-01/2015-01-31)	28	(2015-02-01/2015-02-28)
29	(2015-02-28/2015-04-29)	30	(2015-04-29/2015-07-19)
31	(2015-07-19/2015-09-23)	32	(2015-09-23/2015-11-21)
33	(2015-11-21/2015-12-31)	34	(2016-01-01/2016-04-17)
35	(2016-03-22/2016-05-01)	36	(2016-05-01/2016-07-12)
37	(2016-07-13/2016-09-30)	38	(2016-10-01/2016-12-04)
39	(2016-12-04/2017-01-17)	40	(2017-01-18/2017-01-28)
41	(2017-01-29/2017-02-13)	42	(2017-02-14/2017-03-21)
43	(2017-03-20/2017-08-11)	44	(2017-08-10/2017-12-07)
45	(2017-12-08/2018-01-08)	46	(2018-01-19/2018-03-11)
47	(2018-03-11/2018-09-11)	48	(2018-09-01/2019-02-17)
49	(2019-02-22/2019-06-18)	50	(2019-06-19/2019-10-06)
51	(2019-10-07/2019-12-23)	52	(2019-12-24/2020-04-03)
53	(2020-04-03/2020-07-16)	54	(2020-07-17/2020-09-05)
55	(2020-09-08/2020-11-27)	56	(2020-11-27/2021-06-21)
57	(2021-06-05/2021-09-24)	58	(2021-09-25/2022-01-24)
59	(2022-01-26/2022-02-27)	60	(2022-02-27/2022-04-13)
61	(2022-04-14/2022-05-10)	62	(2022-07-01/2023-12-17)
63	(2022-12-24/2023-04-20)	64	(2023-04-20/2023-08-29)
65	(2023-09-01/2023-12-27)	66	(2023-11-18/2024-02-14)
67	(2024-02-14/2024-06-21)	68	(2024-06-22/2024-xx-xx)

Renaming Template:Q

Template:Q has only 146 transclusions.

On this wiki, {{Q|1043}} renders as:

Q1043

on en.Wikipedia, Wikidata, Commons and elsewhere, it renders as:

Carl Linnaeus (Q1043)

On the other hand, this wiki's {{QID|1043}} renders as:

Carl Linnaeus (Q1043)

I propose to rename the current Template:Q to, say, Template:Wikidata short link, with Template:Q-short as a redirect, replace all instances of {{Q}}, and finally to move Template:QID to Template:Q, leaving a redirect, in order to standardise template behaviour on this wiki with others, and to facilitate the import of updates to them made on other wikis.

Any thoughts? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

As far as I'm seeing here, Template:Q on Wikispecies is just a redirect to Template:Wikidata entity link, which itself is an import of en:Wikidata entity link from en.wiki, while Template:QID is an import of c:Template:Q from Commons. Additionally, these templates seem to serve similar purposes to each other, except that one links to Special:EntityLink/<item>, while the other links to <item> directly. Do we really need both of these templates on Wikispecies? Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

That was my mistake, After posting here, I reimported {{Wikidata entity link}} to get a bug fix that had been applied on en.Wikipedia. That inadvertently overwrote {{Q}}, which I have now restored. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Last call, before I do this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

@Andy Mabbett: Good and sound idea. Please, go ahead. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk)‚ 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC).

I have begun work on this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Switching to the Vector 2022 skin: the final date

A two minute-long video about Vector 2022

Hello everyone, I'm reaching out on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team responsible for the MediaWiki skins. I'd like to revisit the topic of making Vector 2022 the default here on Wikispecies. I did post a message about this two years ago, but we didn't finalize it back then.

What happened in the meantime? We built dark mode and different options for font sizes, and made Vector 2022 the default on most wikis. With the not-so-new V22 skin being the default, existing and coming features, like dark mode and temporary accounts respectively, will become available for logged-out users here.

If you're curious about the details on why we need to deploy the skin soon, here's more information

Due to releases of new features only available in the Vector 2022 skin, our technical ability to support both skins as the default is coming to an end. Keeping more than one skin as the default across different wikis indefinitely is impossible. This is about the architecture of our skins. As the Foundation or the movement in general, we don't have the capability to develop and maintain software working with different skins as default. This means that the longer we keep multiple skins as the default, the higher the likelihood of bugs, regressions, and other things breaking that we do not have the resources to support or fix.   Vector 2022 has been the default on almost all wikis for more than a year. In this time, the skin was proven to provide improvements to readers while also evolving. After we built and deployed on most wikis, we added new features, such as the Appearance menu with the dark mode functionality. We will keep working on this skin, and deployment doesn't mean that existing issues will not be addressed. For example, as part of our work on the Accessibility for Reading project, we built out dark mode, changed the width of the main page back to full (T357706), and solved issues of wide tables overlapping the right-column menus (T330527). Vector legacy's code is not compatible with some of the existing, coming, or future software. Keeping this skin as the default would exclude most users from these improvements. Important examples of features not supported by Vector legacy are: the enriched table of contents on talk pages, dark mode, and also temporary account holder experience which, due to legal reasons, we will have to enable. In other words, the only skin supporting features for temporary account holders (like banners informing "hey, you're using a temp account") is Vector 2022. If you are curious about temporary accounts, read our latest blog post.

So, we will deploy Vector 2022 here in three weeks, in the week of November 25. If you think there are any remaining significant technical issues, let us know. We will talk and may make some changes, most likely after the deployment. Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@SGrabarczuk (WMF): The reason that "we didn't finalize it back then" was because you did not address the issues that were raised at that time. Please will you do so now? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

With no response from User:SGrabarczuk (WMF), the change has been enacted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:04, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, apologies @Pigsonthewing, I meant to answer earlier this week! Thanks for pinging me. Regarding your comments in the previous discussion:

• Authority control - as Wikipedians on Discord helped me to figure out, Module:Authority control uses the deprecated toccolours class. A navbox class with some styling should be used instead. This is how they did it on English Wikipedia. For more context: phab:T314254. If you'd like to dig more and ask for specific fix, I think w:WP:VPT or Discord would be good places to get further help.
• Amount of information on the screen without scrolling down - as I wrote in the message above, in the meantime between our discussions here, the team built the Appearance menu with options for font sizes. Now, it's even more evident that the presentation of a page (positioning of elements) depends on the user's settings and choices (resolution, zoom, selected font size, etc.) rather than the intention of an editor creating a page. As a fun fact and something you may draw some inspiration from, our team members have created Recommendations for mobile friendly articles on Wikimedia wikis. This set of tips isn't really just about mobile-friendliness. It explains what to do to make a page look good regardless of the user's settings and choices.

I realize the Wikispecies community isn't the largest, and some highly technical issues are even harder to fix. But anyway, hope these links help! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 13:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you; and many thanks to User:Izno, who has now attended to toccolours and related matters. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

R.A. Dunn

Who can help me with the fullname for R.A. Dunn. He is an Australian arachnologist and published in the 1945-1960. He was Honorary Arachnologist, National Museum of Victoria. PeterR (talk) 14:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I have asked a contact I have at NMV. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────┘

I have an answer, and their gracious apologies that it took a while to track down the information: Ron A Dunn.

In fact, they say:

RA Dunn, Esq, AAA, AAIS, was Ron. Only found his name in one letter, every other reference to him was either Mr Dunn or by his initials.

FYI the reference to the letter dated 8 November 1963 addressed to Mr Ron Dunn, Arachnologist, National Museum of Victoria, from the Department of Agriculture, Victoria, in the following file in Museums Victoria Archives:

OLDERSYSTEM~03314 MV ARCHIVES - NATIONAL MUSEUM OF VICTORIA - ARACHNOLOGY - General Enquiries 1963

Ron Dunn was appointed Honorary Arachnologist at the National Museum of Victoria, receiving a letter from RTM Pescott, Director on 23 February 1948 addressed to his home in Carnegie, Victoria. He was an Honorary Associate until his death on 25 June 1972. His wife Gladys Dunn received a letter of sympathy from John McNally, Director on 10 July 1972 from the museum addressed to their home in Carnegie, Victoria.

I checked the minutes and annual reports where often a short bio was noted when a staff member or honorary passed away, but found no other details about Ron Dunn, sadly after 24 years at the museum.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:07, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

ancestry.com gives "Dunn, Ronald Albert, 60 Mimosa Road, S.E. 9, accountant"

I'm also told that newspapers.com, shows that The Age had a report about Ronald Albert Dunn on 27 Jun 1972. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:12, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Now at Ronald Albert Dunn. @PeterR: ICYMI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Andy, thanks for your information PeterR (talk)

A revisit of Taxonbar

• Hi everyone, since it has recently been added to the species Eunectes murinus I am thinking on our previous discussions on the Taxonbar. In the past we have banned its use on Wikispecies here and there were a number of comments on it at the time. For myself a way of explanation, I did vote against it but I had hoped at the time it would be redesigned to be more relevant to what we do here rather than be a copy of its usage on Wikipedia, which is a valid usage at WP I am not disputing that.
• To use it effectively here I think we need to focus it on what we do and the sources we have to recognise. Hence one of the things I wanted was a re-ordering of the available databases linked to and separation of them to different lines between Primary and Secondary sources. Some could be deleted.
• I will speak in terms of Animals here to keep it simple, a similar arrangement would be done for plants it would just be different groups. You may find it easier to look at the module config for this. For an animal species I believe the first record should be the ZooBank id followed by Gbif. This would be followed by CoL, WoRMS, PaleoDB, Fossilworks, IUCN, Species+, Irming and then Wikidata and Wikipedia. End of line. On the next line can go any secondary databases. These should be separated by a line and maybe even the top line be a more clear font to draw attention to the Primary databases. I do not consider Wikidata and Wikipedia as Primary but they should be visible on this top line in our situation. To use the Taxonbar I think Wikidata and at least one other Primary database should be compulsory, my preference in animals is ZooBank (however I acknowledge that not all older taxa have a ZooBank record).
• All of our information is eventually stored in Wikidata anyway and then makes its way at some point to Wikipedia, at least through their taxobox template. They use the Taxonbar and can list everything if they wish. We need to show reliability of the nomenclature we are presenting. I thought we could have this discussion, the module is here and some people are rarely using it, we should I think set it up to display information most relevant to what we do. Would appreciate feedback on this.

Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 14:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm quite neutral on what should or should not be here within the taxonbar, just in addition to the above list don't forgot the World Spider Catalog. Also just an observation on the use of the identifiers stored in Wikidata, if you go to the page given as exemple by Faendalimas, Eunectes murinus, you go the taxonbar at the bottom, you click on the Gbif identifier, then you go at the bottom of the page in Gbif and you have a complete list of the identifiers coming from Wikidata for this taxon. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

If there is consensus to add {{Taxonbar}} to a significant # of pages, I can help with that. See this bot request for approval from en.wiki to do just that, that I can easily apply here. Tom.Reding (talk) 18:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Good initiative, @Scott. I agree with all of your suggestions, and @Christian Ferrer's note about the WSC is of course also important. I haven't had time to read all the details about @Tom.Reding's bot yet, but know that he is a is a well-renowned cross-wiki contributor in good standing, and having access to a bot to add the {{Taxonbar}} template would most likely be beneficial.

–Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC).

The ban of taxonbar ended already in May 2022 (Link to the Vote). The standard page layout is to add Taxonbar at the bottom after Commonscat [1]. --Thiotrix (talk) 10:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds great to me! Any chance to add the following databases to {{Taxonbar}}: Catalogue of Palaearctic Heteroptera, Plant Bug Inventory and Fulgoromorpha Lists On the Web? Best, --Hiouf (talk) 12:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ahh totally forgot about that vote @Thiotrix: thanks for the reminder. Which I took part in lol. Anyway thats all cool but I would still like people to consider ordering the databases to separate Primary and Secndary. Note many of the ones that I did not list which would appear on the secondary databases are used to formulate the global databases including ours, as such they are a it redundant as references in this situation. That does not mean they should not be listed. I just wanted to make sure the Taxonbar was clear on these resources listing the most important ones first. We can of course add others @Hiouf: but we do need to examine them. Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 13:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment Actually the identifiers seems to be in alphabetic order, and it seems that our taxonbar don't show all identifiers available in Wikidata. This table in Wikidata is maybe not exhaustive but surely more complete than our module here. Now several questions: 1/do we add all identifiers here, and 2/ in what order? if the answers are 1/no and 2/we chose a specific order (i.e. not alphabetical): then we should make here a bullet list of what exactly we want and in what order. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
  • I think we should as I mentioned divide it into two jointly presented lists. The top row being global databases relevant to all taxa, so the ones I mentioned for animals the plants will have to be added eg IPNI, then only those used would appear, at the end of this line would be Wikidata and Wikipedia (last one optional as this is on Wikidata for all available languages we could really only list one for space reasons and it would be ENWP). Second line all other databases in alphabetical order.
  • I guess for the moment we would add all identifiers, but this may change in the future. Currently underway ie in development, is a method of developing governance metrics for checklists which will give users a traffic light effective overview of the quality of each checklist. We may wish, once its fully available, to impliment its findings. Not all checklists are equal, we may wish to focus on the more reliable ones but we need a process for determining that. I have been involved in the development of this for a number of years and we have tested it on a number of checklists, inormation not avilable yet, some do not standup well at all, others are very good. However, that is a conversation for the future. For now I say list them all just separate out a set of very important ones.
  • By the way that table seems to be missing Catalogue of Life as its one of two truly Global Species Lists and the one now being promoted as the future Global List it should be there. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 14:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
•  Done Wikidata and Wikipedia are at the end: [2], some identifiers are moved to the to of the list: [3], I will add very soon the suggestions made by Hiouf above and will also look of what is missing from Wikidata. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

For plants, the main databases are IPNI, POWO, and Col, but for fungi, Index Fungorum and MycoBank are more important, and for algae, its AlgaeBase. For Orthoptera, Orthoptera species file may be the main source, and for Cerambycidae, I ususally look at TITAN (which is not yet in our taxobox). As every group has its own main database, I strongly would prefer that all databases are kept in alphabetical order. --Thiotrix (talk) 17:02, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I am only suggesting that the Primary ones be separate, also as they are mostly Code aligned many will not have data so wont appear, eg IPNI and ZooBank are exclusive of each other. There should only be a few appearing in this top line. After that its alphabetical. I agree Index Fungorum should be in there and for the time being Algaebase. Most Checlists are being utilised by CoL now, through Checklist Bank. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 19:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• I can submit a BRFA soon, but a few questions first:
  1. Should {{Taxonbar}} only be placed on pages which have an ID, and thus produce an output? On en.wiki, it was only placed when an ID was present, with some IDs even excluded from that count.
  2. Should |from= be used or omitted? On en.wiki, |from= is a required parameter since it's used as a method of tracking QID moves at Wikidata, which are only ephemerally visible on WS via the watchlist, since the WD moves don't show up on the WS history page.

Tom.Reding (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I would say yes to both, which is often going to mean it gets added several days after a new page is created as many of the new taxa we add have no Wikidata entry until everything catches up. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 18:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

BRFA submitted —Tom.Reding (talk) 15:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Followup question #1: should {{Taxonbar}} be placed on redirects? I've been avoiding them so far, just in case. —Tom.Reding (talk) 12:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion a redirect page contains only the redirect template after all checks have been completed. Andyboorman (talk) 14:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Not necessarily. See Nebelia, Pseudorlaya, & Huanaca. In my small scan of ~2000 pages, these appear ~40% of the time compared to minimalist redirects. —Tom.Reding (talk) 15:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done thanks and apologies for missing these. Andyboorman (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Followup question #2: should {{Taxonbar}} be placed on literature templates such as Template:Sundevall, 1846a, etc.? Ping to RLJ who brought it to my attention. —Tom.Reding (talk) 00:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

My view is to keep them off the literature templates just on actual taxa. First the lits are only used to populate the taxa anyway for the most part and second we really do need at some point to address the literature templates and alter how we do that. Its going to be a difficult discussion but they are outdated and need to be brought up to machine readability, so I would rather not complicate them further right now. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 04:33, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

There are >0 literature templates that could have, eg, a BHL link (and the corresponding wikidata page does) but don't - so having taxonbar (or equivalent) on these is quite helpful. Plus there may be other links that come through from wikidata, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 06:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

@Tom.Reding: I already use {{Authority control}}, wich already have number of right identifiers for that purpose, on literature templates and it works quite well, IMO no need to use the taxonbar for this, e.g. look at {{Rogacheva, Gebruk & Alt, 2013}}. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:00, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• I tested a couple on species I know well saw one come out a little strange though I get why Myuchelys latisternum Has displayed two entries one as its current name and one under its protonym. Do not know if we wish to address that issue. Zoobank lits species under their protonyms, not current arrangement if its changed hence it has double entry. It also has 2 Wikidata id's one under each name. I would suggest iNaturalist should go into alphabetical order with the rest it is not a primary source. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 19:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• I updated the Taxonbar with some identifiers coming from the table in Wikidata (and ignored a few that don's seems to work. @Hiouf: Catalogue of Palaearctic Heteroptera, Plant Bug Inventory can not currently be added to the taxonbar as they don't have yet a corresponding property in Wikidata Fulgoromorpha Lists On the Web is already available in the Taxonbar. @Faendalimas: as regard to the two entries as e.g. in Myuchelys latisternum that is indeed an automatic fonctionality of the Taxonbar to make that when in Wikidata there is a relation "original combination/protonym of". In the extand that the two records exist separatly into external databases, personaly I don't see nothing bad to retrieve that, but well, if needed I can try to desactive this fonctionality [note that in case of several names involved you can force the display of the identifiers of as many names as you want]. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
•  Comment note that I moved back to alphabetic order since there is no consensus, anyway we can do it later if we agree. I left wikidata and wikipedia at the end. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  There is a quality of data issue with that. The ones I suggested for the top have the highest quality of data and have unique identifiers, eg the ZooBank LsId is a unique identifier widely published and used throughout nomenclature. Both highly desirable considering what we do here. Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 14:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• "To use the Taxonbar I think Wikidata and at least one other Primary database should be compulsory" This can be hard-coded into the template (like we do for {{Image}} and {{Authority control}} already), so that the template can be inserted into a page and will magically show when and only when the criteria are met. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  English Wikipedia's Taxonbar doesn't display if there are no database IDs on Wikidata. Presumably that hasn't been changed in the Wikispecies version of Taxonbar. I'm not sure if this is still the case, but en.wiki Taxonbar also wasn't displaying if the only database IDs were EOL and/or GBIF; EOL and GBIF both scraped bogus names that originated on Wikipedia. Plantdrew (talk) 16:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  • @Pigsonthewing: it needs to be very specific databases though not any, so Wikidata + ZooBank / CoL for an animal; WikiData + INPI / CoL for a plant (those are examples) but not secondary databases that are absorbed into CoL for example. This is why I tried to get them separated into two sections. I am not sure how easy that would be to code, or not.
  • @Plantdrew: yeah same hereas Wikipedia for no id on Wikidata. As I said above I would prefer to only display if specific databases were present, the secondary ones can be listed of course but there are issues across many of them. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 17:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Label links

The link to "Wikidata" should probably go to Wikidata on this project, not to en:Wikidata. Same for any others that have a page here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata property proposal: ZSL Authority ID

I have made a proposal for a new Wikidata property, "ZSL Authority ID":

d:Wikidata:Property proposal/ZSL Authority ID

which we can potentially include in our {{Authority control}} template. Please comment on that proposal. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:44, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata property proposal for homonyms

Hello, just a little notification in case you're interested, there is a property proposal regarding homonymy, see Wikidata:Wikidata:Property proposal/homonym of. Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! captain Ben Richards (talk) 08:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Let's Connect Program

Dear all,

I hope this topic finds you all well. My name is Gorana Gomirac and I am a part of the Let’s Connect working group. We are a team of 8 who represent: Latina America, MENA, South Asia, East, South East Asia, Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa, Central & Eastern Europe, Northern & Western region. If you are interested in participating in learning clinics , I welcome you to fill out this registration form. You will gain access to our monthly newsletter, our monthly learning clinics and even become a sharer where you and your community can give a workshop/learning clinic to our fellow Let’s Connectors. We look forward to include more topics about Wikispecies so please feel free to reach out to us!

If you have any questions please email us at letsconnect@wikimedia.org

Kind regards, Gorana Gomirac (VMRS) (talk) 11:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Taxonomy (journal)

Hello, I have a question regarding the date(s) of Taxonomy, Volume 1, Issue 1 [4], at the top of that page it is stated that the issue is from March 2021, however each articles from that issues have its own date of publication in 2020, e.g. DOI: 10.3390/taxonomy1010002: "Published: 29 October 2020", so what are we going to follow here? for the templates here in Wikispecies, and of course for the potential authorships of the taxa!?

Currently we is seems that we have two templates here for the articles of that issue, one ({{Bang, 2021}}) created by User:Isfisk follow the issue date, the other {{Park, Rohal & Lee, 2020}} created by me follow the date quoted in the article page. What should we do? 2020 or 2021? Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:01, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

This issue is not exclusive to this journal, others have had the same issue. I usually follow the issued date to create the template, and on template "date of publication", i put the online versus issued date. For authorship/year of the taxa i follow ZooBank acceptance. Burmeister (talk) 17:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Help to identify species

possible w:Polygala myrtifolia in New South Wales Australia

Did I get the species right? Thanks. Gryllida (talk) 06:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Related: [5] Gryllida (talk) 06:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Seems you have identified correctly. Andyboorman (talk) 09:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

ZSL authority ID

ZSL authority ID (P13170) has been created on Wikidata. I have added it to {{Authority control}}. An example can be seen on Henri M. André. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

P.A. Mitchell

Who can help me with th full names from P.A. Mitchell? He published together with Gauld in:

• Gauld I.D. & Mitchell P.A. 1978. The Taxonomy, Distribution and Host Preferences of African Parasitic Wasps of the Subfamily Ophioninae. CAB: Slough / Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London.
• Gauld I.D. & Mitchell P.A. 1981. The Taxonomy, Distribution and Host Preferences of Indo-Papuan Parasitic Wasps of the Subfamily Ophioninae. CAB: Slough / Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London.

PeterR (talk) 09:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

"Pamela A. Mitchell (RIP) was Ian Gauld’s wife..." https://zookeys.pensoft.net/article/35786 Quasi-grip (talk) 14:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

​Hej Quasi-grip! Pamela A. Mitchell worked closely together with her husband Ian David Gauld. I know that for example Euplectrus pammitchellae and Glyptapanteles pamitchellae were named in her honour, but eponymy isn't quite enough to meet our notability guidelines for creating an author page.

Do you know whether she has published any taxonomical work or taxon names of her own (in which case we can create a Wikispecies page for her). –Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC).

Does it have to be on her own? There are quite a few "Gauld & Mitchell, 1978" out there.

• https://www.waspweb.org/pdfs/Gauld_and_Mitchell_1978.pdf
• https://sv.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22av+Ian+D.+Gauld+och+Mitchell+1978%22

Quasi-grip (talk) 10:17, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Biodiversity Heritage Library user template

{{User BHL}} is now available; you can see an example on my user page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

William Swainson

Please see Talk:William John Swainson. The great great grandson of Swainson claims, with good arguments, that the second name John never existed. Task for a bot, or, let's start a massive manual correction? Remember Louis "Jean" Pierre Vieillot, never Jean.... Hector Bottai (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:22, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

FYI: Over 200 new species identified in Southeast Asia

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-16/wwf-lists-234-new-species-discovered-in-south-east-asia/104731756 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)