User talk:Rtnf

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 following syntax and formatting rules.
• 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! -- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Vernacular name of Scomber japonicus

Hello Rtnf. I have a question about your recent edit of the Scomber japonicus page, where you replaced the Indonesian vernacular name "makerel pasifik" (literally "Pacific mackerel") with "ikan salem" (literally "salmon fish"). I thought that "makerel pasifik" is the vernacular name specifically used for Scomber japonicus, a species of mackerel fish in the order Scombridae? And that "ikan salem" is a vernacular name used for a wide variety of several different species of salmon fishes (in the order Salmoniformes). In that case your edit is incorrect, and unfortunately must be reverted.

Or instead perhaps I'm wrong, and "ikan salem" is indeed only used for the species Scomber japonicus, and no other species. In that case your edit here is correct and can remain, but the equivalent w:id:Makerel pasifik page on the Indonesian Wikipedia must be changed instead. By the way, the current Indonesian Wikipedia page "Makerel pasifik" specifically describes the species Scomber japonicus, while w:id:Ikan Salem is automatically redirected to w:id:Salmon.

–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:02, 17 July 2021 (UTC).

Scomber japonicus is "ikan salem". Here is a research article to back it up. Paragraph 2, first sentence, "pendahuluan" section.  :

... Salah satu ikan yang dipasarkan di TPI Muara Angke adalah Ikan salem (Scomber japonicus)

I also verified it by myself by buying it on the market and matching its description to Scomber japonicus' description.

People around here are calling this fish as "ikan salem". It usually sold on daily market as a food. I've never heard that they are using the term "makerel pasifik". But, we already have "makerel pasifik" Indonesian Wikipedia page, describing Scomber japonicus, so i just follow it.

Regarding the claim that salem is salmon, i think i'm gonna disagreeing with it. We, Indonesians, have separate word to refer "ikan salem" and "ikan salmon". Not as synonym, not used interchangeably. But somehow, in Indonesian Wikipedia, there is a claim that salem is salmon, and Ikan Salem page is redirected to Ikan Salmon page. Since i dont have enough authority on Indonesian Wikipedia to change and debate this, i can't do anything. That's why i go on wikispecies and wikidata entry. Rtnf (talk) 12:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I see, thank you for the explanation (and for the link!) Vernacular names are always tricky. For example this species has got at least 26 different names in Spanish and 14 names in English – perhaps more. And all of those names are correct: the only difference is that they are used in different parts of the world. However the "Usage" section of the Wikispecies guideline for vernacular names stipulates that we should only add one vernacular name per language to each taxon, so Wikispecies always needs to try and find the (globally) most commonly used name. And if the Indonesian (or any other) Wikipedia is wrong, that's really nothing that we are overly concerned about. :-)

Please do not hesitate to ask if you have any further comments or questions about Wikispecies. Happy editing! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:15, 17 July 2021 (UTC).

Wiktionary and encyclopedic data

I'm just an amateur zoologist/botanist. I dont have deep knowledge about biology in general. But i would love to share my local knowledge about certain species. For example, lately i've been documenting all the vernacular name of species (either animal or plant) that is found around my city. But, i do it on inaturalist instead.

https://www.inaturalist.org/lists/4313723-Tumbuhan-di-Bekasi https://www.inaturalist.org/lists/4314363-Hewan-Indonesia

Now, my work is tripled. From wikidata, i link it with wikispecies and inaturalist. And along the three, i may add redundant missing value on each of them.

Each of them have unique advantages i think. For example, on wikidata, we can add reference for every "claim" that we made about things. While on inaturalist, we can add a photo and its coordinate, where the species is actually found.

How about wikispecies? Does this site only focusing on name and classification? Why there is no encyclopedic explanation for each genus/species? Rtnf (talk) 00:53, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

First of all, Wikidata is only used to serve the other Wikimedia projects. The sole purpose of Wikidata is to act as a sort of "hub" that lets Wikipedia, Wikispecies, Commons, Wikiversity etc. connect and share data in between the different projects. Secondly, yes Wikispecies only focus on the taxonomy and disciplines closely related to taxonomy. That's why vernacular names generally have a very low "status" on Wikispecies, and why the "Vernacular names" sections are always placed at the very bottom of every Wikispecies taxon page, below the references and all other information. The overlaying reason for this is that vernacular names very seldom has anything to do with the taxonomy of taxa, hence they are almost out of scope for this project. (Every other year or so some of our users raise the question whether we should simply delete all vernacular names altogether, since they aren't helpful for the projects' main purpose. So far the community has voted to keep them, but it's often a close call.)

To conclude, please note that Wikispecies is very different from the other sister sites within the Wikimedia sphere, perhaps especially in comparison to Wikipedia. While Wikipedia is a generally kept "all you can eat" encyclopaedia, Wikispecies is only a database for taxa, taxonomy, biological systematics and type repositories, plus information about the authors and publications needed to verify that data. Nothing else. That's the answer to your question why we don't have any encyclopedic explanations for each genus/species: the reason is that Wikispecies isn't an encyclopedia! Wikipedia describes different organisms (e.g. the actual animals and plants), while Wikispecies only keeps records of the taxa that those organisms are part of. It's also important to remember that we don't "compete" with Wikipedia: instead we supplement it (and vice versa). This also means that Wikispecies will always take on a much more scientific approach, while Wikipedia is more mainstream. All of the admins are quite stern when it comes to this fact, and if a user adds "Wikipedia-style" texts to Wikispecies it will normally be removed within minutes (generally together with a note saying that the information is better suited for Wikipedia).

For a short summary of this and related matters, please read What Wikispecies is not.

Thanks for the iNaturalist links! Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC).