Wikispecies:Village Pump

WikiSpecies notext-invert.svg 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:

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 (2022-07-01/2022-xx-xx)

'Maymyo Herb.'Edit

As seen from this search result, Bremekamp (1937, 1938) described some Ixora species, specifying their type repository as 'Maymyo Herb.'. According to Empire Forestry Review 28(1): 12–13 (1949), the greater part of Maymyo Herbarium had been once taken away by Japanese museum agency and placed there during the Japanese occupation of Burma (1942–1945), until about 10,000 specimen sheets were recovered and returned to Burma, while the rest was burnt by Japanese vandals. The problem I would like to discuss here is that how we have to dispose of this herbarium. Index Herbariorum of NYBG Steere Herbarium lists 5 herbaria in Burma, but none of them is of Maymyo (Pyin Oo Lwin). The EFR article also states that the founder of the herbarium is attributed to Sir Alexander Rodger (1 August 1875 – 30 September 1950), O.B.E., who was appointed as Forest Research Officer for Burma just before WWI (1914–1918). I guess that the surviving collections are now deposited in RAF, since it is the only herbarium founded before WWII (1939–1945) and associated with Forest Department, Ministry of Forestry among the 5 institutions. However, we need more definite evidence to judge it. Then I propose that we create Maymyo Herbarium and add the information provided by the EFR article there until its identity becomes clear. --Eryk Kij (talk) 05:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

  • I will carry out my plan unless no one opposes. --Eryk Kij (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


Category:Mycologists, which has 2,797 members, has the header text:

Due to wrong data imports this category contains dozens of people, which never have worked in the field of mycology. Please don't use.

present since 2016. What should be done with it? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:54, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps it's possible to run a check through Wikidata in some way, in order to see if any of the authors in our category is not listed as a mycologists in Wikidata? Not at all fool proof as Wikidata may be wrong as well, but always a start. Also User:Kopiersperre, who added the header text you refer to, already removed almost 40 names from the category. Unfortunately they haven't made any edits to Wikispecies since October 2016 (as far as I can see the last of their edit to any Wikimedia sister project was a contribution to Wikimedia Commons in July 2017). –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC).
By the way the Wikidata item mycologist (Q2487799) links to 3,202 Wikidata items, most of them about authors within the field of mycology. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:03, 26 December 2022 (UTC).
Don't bother with a check through Wikidata: I've found that many mycologists (and probably also lichenologists, phycologists, bryologists, etc?) are in turn mislabelled as botanists on Wikidata, I suspect somebody wrongly assumed all IPNI authorities were botanists and imported them to Wikidata with that assumption. Monster Iestyn (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
In some cases such as Maria Muntañola Cvetković (Q21392085), it looks lke Kopiersperre even removed the mycologist occupation from them where they were imported from Wikispecies, even if they were still labelled a mycologist on Wikispecies. Monster Iestyn (talk) 02:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I've removed the text from the category; there seems to be no-one in support of keeping it, no contemporary discussion, and the reason for its addition is unclear. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

My guess is that he might have been trying to deprecate the category, after deciding the whole lot was "bad"; he also originally removed the Biologists category (only for it to be added again a few months later). Couldn't blame him after fixing so many lichenologist/mycologist mixups on Wikispecies, but it's a pity he didn't communicate this change on Village Pump or anything at the time. Monster Iestyn (talk) 19:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Template:Documentation is brokenEdit

{{documentation}} is giving Lua error in Module:Documentation at line 140: message: type error in message cfg.container (string expected, got nil). on pages that transclude it. The last edit appears to be mine of 1 December, but MediaWiki is telling me that that has already ben reverted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Per Module talk:Documentation, the problem is that Module:Documentation is imported from and Module:Documentation/config was imported from Meta-Wiki. It turns out that and Meta-Wiki's implementations of the Documentation Lua modules aren't the same, so the two module pages need to be imported from the same wiki to work properly. Monster Iestyn (talk) 19:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
@Andy Mabbett and Monster Iestyn: So its should be fairly easy to fix then. The question is whether we prefer the enWP or Meta versions of the Documentation Module and its config file? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 03:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC).
Presumably, the Meta: versions have better multi-lingual support? The sooner we have Global templates and modules, usable across wikis, the better. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)a
I agree. The most straightforward procedure would be to delete Module:Documentation and Module:Documentation/config and then reimport them from meta:Module:Documentation and meta:Module:Documentation/config. Both imports should be done more or less simultaneously, so that the two imported versions are in synch. Note: at the moment the two files are each linked to by 1,903 different Wikispecies templates, so all in all the reimport may make an impact on several tens of thousands of pages. Any thoughts or objections? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC).

────────── I extend a heads-up to all administrators so that they can contribute with thoughts and ideas: 1234qwer1234qwer4AccassidyAlvaroMolinaAndyboormanBurmeisterCirceusDan KoehlDannyS712EncycloPeteyFaendalimas FloscuculiGeniHector BottaiKaganerKeith EdkinsKoavfMKOliverMPFMariusmNeferkheperre OhanaUnitedPeterRPigsonthewingRLJThiotrix.
Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 02:51, 2 January 2023 (UTC).

  • Keeping sync with Meta makes sense to me until/unless we have global templates. :/ —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
  • There's only one way to find out if this is the right thing to do...
As I've cautioned elsewhere, we need to watch for the template being overwritten, if it's a child of something else that is imported from en.Wikipedia Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
  • EN is likely to be more actively maintained but that means more changes so meta may be easier.Geni (talk) 18:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
  • I haven't had time to check the actual code yet, but there are also what looks to be well maintained versions at MediaWiki: mw:Module:Documentation and mw:Module:Documentation/config. If the MediaWiki versions and their links are good, then maybe this is the way to go? My reason for this is that MediaWiki is (or at least should be) the main "repository" for much of our wiki source code, much in the same way Commons is our library for pictures and other media. This is also reflected by the fact that the MediaWiki page on Global templates and modules is the main hub for proposals to make templates shared across all wikis: for example, Meta's page on the same issue is only a soft redirect to the MediaWiki page. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC).

Anisoscelini vs AnisoscelidiniEdit

It was recommended I post this here. In reference to the Coreidae tribe Anisoscelini

According to Packauskas, 1994. the root for this family, Anisoscelis, does not take a D in its combining roots. So the name of the tribe should be Anisocelini. This was confirmed later in Packauskas & Schaefer, 2001. and is followed by Coreoidea species file — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ncb1221 (talkcontribs) 16:25, 15 January 2023‎.

Voting now open on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of ConductEdit

Hello all,

The voting period for the revised Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines is now open! Voting will be open for two weeks and will close at 23:59 UTC on January 31, 2023. Please visit the voter information page on Meta-wiki for voter eligibility information and details on how to vote.

For more details on the Enforcement Guidelines and the voting process, see our previous message.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

JPBeland-WMF (talk) 00:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


Working on some taxa of ornithologist John Todd Zimmer found more than a hundred taxa linked to disambiguation page Zimmer. It was not difficult to find that belong to German carcinologist Carl Wilhelm Erich Zimmer which seems to me be very important at least for the order Cumacea. And surprise! didn't have even a page for the author. So, page, taxa category and eponym category are created. Also found an impressive list of publications at Cumacea page, but nothing linked or templated. Now I leave for those specialists or interested in carcinology to continue the work. A lot to be done. Cheers. Hector Bottai (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Modern treatments of Reptilia, Aves, etc. (plus reptile orders...)Edit

Most people who follow these things will be aware that over the past 10-15 years, there has been increasing recognition that birds (Aves) evolved from reptiles and so the traditional Linnaean classes Aves and Reptilia do not fit well together in a cladistic sense. Ruggiero et al., 2015 addressed this by making Aves a subclass of class Reptilia, a solution that was not adopted by others e.g. Cat. of Life at that time (even though the Ruggiero et al. classification was intended to be a system for CoL to follow). Also I note traditional orders of Reptilia such as Squamata (still followed in Wikispecies, also the Paleobiology DB at this time) had been moved up to subclass in Ruggiero, with Serpentes, Scincoidea, etc., formerly suborders, re-ranked as orders.

Checking the current (2021) release of CoL I see that they have now (since when??) abandoned Reptilia altogether and replaced it with 4 extant classes i.e. Crocodylia, Sphenodontia, Squamata and Testudines, alongside separate classes Aves and Mammalia, in other words (e.g.) Squamata, at first an order, then a subclass (Ruggiero) is now ranked as a class; however in Wikispecies (also Wikipedia and PBDB) it is still an order; also we still have Reptilia as a class although CoL has abandoned it.

Not sure what is the best way to proceed here but I thought I would float it for others' thoughts at this time, who to follow, and what major recent published treatments might be out there to use as citable sources etc... also I am not sure if the current CoL treatment would be adequate to treat all of the fossil as well as the extant groups of reptiles (no expert here) although there could be plenty of these... e.g. check for my present list of fossil as well as extant orders of reptiles - how many of these would become classes if the CoL concept were applied across the board...

Thoughts and advice welcome! Regards Tony Rees Tony 1212 (talk) 18:33, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Bionomia linksEdit

I've just added Bionomia to the services linked to, from our {{Authority control}} template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Template:Taxon italics for disambiguated taxaEdit

How should Template:Taxon italics be used if the taxon is disambiguated? I just earlier had to rename the plant genus Olfersia to Olfersia (Dryopteridaceae), as there is a valid insect genus with the same name. Unfortunately this causes the Taxon italics template in Template:Olfersia (Dryopteridaceae) to incorrectly italicize "Dryopteridaceae" as "Dryopteridaceae" within the title of the genus page, as of writing. Monster Iestyn (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

In special cases like this you can use the magic word {{DISPLAYTITLE}} as a so called behavior switch to override the {{Taxon italics}} template. As for the Olfersia (Dryopteridaceae) page the fix has already been made by my fellow administrator RLJ: see this diff for his edit. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC).
@Tommy Kronkvist: So I see, that makes sense. Thank you both. Monster Iestyn (talk) 12:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Georg G. Bosse and Georgiy Gustavovich BosseEdit

Is IPNI's Georg G. Bosse (1887–1972) (wikidata item) the same as Georgiy Gustavovich Bosse (1887–1964)? I would have thought so myself, except that the death year of IPNI's record and Russian+German Wikipedias don't agree. But if they are the same person, which is the correct death year: 1972 or 1964? (Where do these dates even come from in the first place?) This all concerns the taxon author page G.G.Bosse, what full name it should use, and whether the two Wikidata items I linked should also be merged. Monster Iestyn (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

HUH Index of Botanists gives a 1972 death date and notes that he collected in Mexico. The Russian Wikipedia article says he went on a collecting expedition to Mexico. It seems very unlikely that there are two people with near identical names who both collected in Mexico, but that doesn't answer the question of death year. Plantdrew (talk) 15:53, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Contact IPNI directly. They are very accommodating and don't bite! Andyboorman (talk) 19:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Could do, though this author's name and years comes straight from Brummitt & Powell (1992)'s Authors of Plant Names as far as I can tell. Monster Iestyn (talk) 19:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Last call to vote on revised UCoC enforcement guidelines!Edit

Hi all,

A friendly and final reminder that the voting period for the revised Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines closes tomorrow, Tuesday, 31 January at 23:59:59 UTC.

The UCoC supports Wikimedia’s equity objectives and commitment to ensuring a welcoming, diverse movement, and it applies to all members of our communities. Voting is an opportunity for you to be a part of deciding how we uphold this commitment to our community and each other!

To vote, visit the voter information page on Meta-wiki, which outlines how to participate using SecurePoll.

Many thanks for your interest and participation in the UCoC!

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team, JPBeland-WMF (talk) 21:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)