Talk:Heroini
This group is very big and very diverse. The taxonomy is in a state of flux, and won't be settled for a while. Nonetheless, there IS some info about the internal groups and their relationships.
Is there something wrong with the Taxonavigation? All Wikispecies articles should have it. - UtherSRG 10:23, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Yes there is. Taxonomy *changes*, and right now is shifting around very fast. So unless it is automated as a script that can be included, it won't work. I agree that it should be there, though, it is just broken as it is now. ...gacp
However, there is no doubt that heroines are vertebrates, or jawed fishes, or most of the taxonavigation shown. If you have a particular point of disagreement with the taxonomy below the family level, I can understand that, but still, it is standard practice on *ALL* Wikispecies articles to incude a taxonavigation. - UtherSRG 22:00, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am just saying, it won't work. It will be broken, sooner or later. E.g. Labroidei is rubbish; Perciformes is paraphyletic; Paratilapia is problematic in Cichlidae. And let's forget about the genera. Not just cichlids: check out Poeciliadae. Oh, sorry, PoeciliNAE now, part of Aplocheilichthydae. And when it fails... will you fix thousands of pages by hand? Because if you don't then the taxonav is worse than nothing. So, it either is generated on the fly by the wiki system, or better do without. - gacp
It's not your call. It's the system we have. We pick a reasonable taxonomy to follow and when it changes, we change it. Eventually we will have a different system, but for now we don't. - UtherSRG 13:53, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
I hope this doen't get too emotional, as I believe that you both have similar viewpoints; I see a general consensus that wikispecies users understand that the taxonavigation will never "work" or become "ultimately true" especially with a science-related/professional target group; on the other hand, a taxonomic overview is an essential red line for many users and knowing of its weak points, I think that the vast majority of all users will appreciate the taxonavigation as a template. Thank you for respecting that! Best, --Benedikt 15:58, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
Of course it is not my call! Why would I think that? You asked whether there was something wrong with it. There is. Oh, how I wish things were that simple! I do databases, BTW. I reiterate my point: it won't work at all unless it is automagic, created on the fly for each page, and it won't work well unless there is built-in handling for ambiguity, i.e. taxonomic disagreement. -gacp