User talk:Alex2guess

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! Please remember to include the species name itself on the page. [1][2] OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding[edit]

Alex,

If you don't know how to add genera, species etc. ask it. This is not good Guineobius niger for example see Agrilus lembik. PeterR (talk) 13:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter. Sorry, I just had a picture at hand that I wanted to contribute, and I realized in the process that it´s not that simple to add a new genus. How would I start properly? The Agrilus-page makes use of basepagename-links and I am not sure how to create them.

Alex — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alex2guess (talk • contribs) 14:12, 21 February 2015.

I have done all the species from Guineobius. You can now contribute the pictures. You do a great job. PeterR (talk) 15:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter. Thanks for your help and your understanding! Currently, I have just pictures of two Guineobius species at hand, but I may be able to take some of the others in future and update them.

— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2003:5a:6f4e:9501:6840:3908:5e17:919d (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2015

Autopatrolled rights[edit]

Dear Alex2guess, You have been granted autopatrolled user rights, which may be granted to experienced Wikispecies users who have demonstrated an understanding of Wikispecies policies and guidelines. In addition to what registered users can do, autopatrollers can have one's own edits automatically marked as patrolled (autopatrol). The autopatrol user right is intended to reduce the workload of new page patrollers and causes pages created by autopatrolled users to be automatically marked as patrolled. For more information, read Wikispecies:Autopatrollers.

This user has autopatrolled rights on Wikispecies. (verify)

You may as autpatroller use the autopatroller user box on your user page. Copy and paste the following code on your user page:

Dan Koehl (talk) 21:30, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Your taxon pages are looking great. I did make this template for you very recent work: Riedel & Tänzler, 2016, and put it on Trigonopterus, and pages for both authors. Reference templates are great, and can be fixed with edits automatically transcluding to all necessary pages. This page will help you figure things out: Help:Reference_section. For one year today, I have been creating templates for Zootaxa and Zookeys, and installing them in proper taxon sections, and author pages. This creates uniformity and assures completeness. Some other users are making templates for their own specialties from these two journals, which speeds up my day. I can then simply tone up basic citations with nomenclatural acts and author links. If you need any help let me know. Neferkheperre (talk) 16:05, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Neferkheperre: thanks a lot for your help! I have just replaced the full citation by the reference in the respective species. Actually, when I started with these pages I tried to figure out how to use a template similar to the ones existing for my older papers, but at the time it was not created yet. Is there an easy way to create reference-templates (for infrequent users such as me)? Usually, I just try to bring my data online after I have published a new revision. Again, many thanks for your help! Alex2guess (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really no shortcut other than practice. For journal names, see category:ISSN for getting ISSN #s and blue-linking those names. There are many things which enhance citation templates, using them comes with time, and you can always go back and improve your older templates. I am doing this myself in Cirripedia. Locating online links to articles is important, and very useful. Neferkheperre (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe one more addition: I just had some problems creating a new page for Lijudmilinius, subgenus of Euops. I think the problem is also, that I would need to create a template for this subgenus name. No clue how to do it. Could you help me to do it or give me some advice how I could do it? Alex2guess (talk) 18:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I created Lijudmilinius template for you. By checking edit section, you can see its construction, which is really quite simple. First line is template for next upward taxon. Don't forget that forced line break as it saves some trouble in creating taxon pages. Our goal is to template taxon names down to genus-group level. Indicating subgenus status in template, and creating taxon page title as subgenus name only, removes some editing when subgenus is elevated to genus status, which is frequent. Neferkheperre (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neferkheperre's {{Lijudmilinius}} template above is an excellent example. There is a second way that also gets the job done, namely by including the {{Gbr}} template. That template will automatically add a wiki link to the taxon name, as well as a forced line break at the end. Furthermore it will also automatically add italics – hence it shouldn't be used on taxa of higher rank than genus. Either method is good, but using the {{gbr}} makes it impossible to forget the trailing line break, since it is added automatically. If you like to see how this alternative way of doing it looks in practice, please check out the {{Kobusynaptops}} template I've created as an example.

You are of course free to use whichever method you feel suits you the best, since if implemented properly they will both render identical results. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Many thanks for yout help! I will be able to try it out soon. Alex2guess (talk) 03:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry guys – I have to ask again about templates. The problem is that I am still missing the basic procedure here: Can I create a new template within wikispecies, or do I have to go to wikidata? I am just not sure where exactly I can click the "create new"-botton. Now I had a look at genus Thyestetha, which existed already as a genus of Curculionidae. As soon as I start creating species pages I find the template for this genus does not exist yet. Thanks for an advice!Alex2guess (talk) 05:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "Create new" button. Simply add a page name to the search box, and hit enter. If a page with that particular name doesn't exist, it will show up as a red link (i.e. non-existing page) in the search results. Click the red link and start editing, and "show preview". Check the page for errors and then hit save, and voilà – the page is created. Templates and categories are created in the same way, however the page name then must always starts with "Template:" and "Category:". –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:36, 6 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Tommy: A million thanks for the explanation - almost too simple to find out myself. I just tried it out for subgenus Pareuops of Euops. Worked perfectly well. Many thanks! Alex2guess (talk) 13:32, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Categories[edit]

Alex,

We add the categories by the official species. In this case by Euops armatus or Euops (Riedelinius) armatus. I don't have the original descriptions. I think you have them. Regards PeterR (talk) 10:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peter: Yes, the original descriptions of these species was under Euops. Legalov (2003) described separate genera bas on all the species-groups, and these genera were downgraded by Setliff 2007 as subgenera of Euops. I am not sure if we want to reflect this history under "Synonymy". Maybe, have a look at E. armatus. If this finds consensus, I could add info of the other species of this subgenus. Best regards Alex2guess (talk) 11:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I just added info for E. gressitti and based this on the existing page of E. armatus. However, if I check in "Alexander Riedel taxa" the former is listed among Euops (Riedelinius), whereas E. armatus is just under Euops (as should be). Can you give me a clue how I can change this? The text that I added has the same structure in both cases, so this is a bit of a mystery to me. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alex2guess (talk • contribs) 05:54, 29 February 2016.

Hi Alex, we discussed this question a couple of months ago: -> discussion

I still do not understand, why we need two articles with the same content, e.g.: Euops (Riedelinius) and Riedelinius. --Murma174 (talk) 07:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi: thanks for the hint. I agree that it will be best in this case to use mainly Genus and species name. My concern is mainly a practical/technical aspect: The pages of Euops gressitti and of Euops armatus are structured quite the same. BUT - if you see them listed, for example by looking at all the "Alexander Riedel taxa" you find that one is listed without the subgenus name and the other with it. I would be curious how I can avoid having the subgenus-name inserted in such a list.

Alex2guess (talk) 07:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate and/or incorrectly named Euops[edit]

Hello. You've recently created both Euops wallacei and Euops wallacaei. I'm guessing that the latter one is an incorrectly named version of the former? Should I delete the Euops wallacaei page, in favour of Euops wallacei? Or are they perhaps both correct?
Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 05:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Tommy: thanks for the notice! Yes, Euops wallacaei should be deleted. Also, if you want to do me another favour, could you delete the page of Euops (Riedelinius) gressitti and transfer its content to a new page Euops gressitti. I just realized that I need to take special caution which title of a new page is created and if this includes the subgenus name (which it probably should not). The species was originally published in Euops. Thanks a lot! Alex2guess (talk) 05:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hint: If you want to create a Species page from a Subgenus page without the Subgenus in the title, you can use/change the template, e.g. not {{sgsp|E|uops|R|iedelinius|gressitti}} but -> {{sgsps|E|uops|R|iedelinius|gressitti}} In the first case you will be directed to Euops (Riedelinius) gressitti, in the second case to Euops gressitti. --Murma174 (talk) 07:32, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I created Euops gressitti using the data from Euops (Riedelinius) gressitti, which I instead changed to a redirect page, linking it to Euops gressitti. (Leaving a redirect behind is not strictly necessary, but will make sure that any future links to Euops (Riedelinius) gressitti will automatically be redirected to Euops gressitti, if any.) Furthermore I deleted Euops wallacaei, and changed the E. wallacaei species link on the Euops genus page to Euops wallacei.

While on the subject, please note that the author A.A. Legalov (linked from Euops gressitti) is identical to Andrei Alexsandrovich Legalov. In order to avoid a redirect, in the future please use the latter link rather than a link to "A.A. Legalov".

Happy editing! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:07, 1 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks! Maybe one more practical lesson for me: I created the page for Euops aculeatus. But, it does not link automatically to the same species when listed under subgenus Riedelinius. How to deal with it best?Alex2guess (talk) 12:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page Euops (Riedelinius) aculeatus does not exist yet. Create a redirect page with the content #REDIRECT [[Euops aculeatus]] --Murma174 (talk) 12:27, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Example: E. gressitti --Murma174 (talk) 12:33, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Future deletion requests[edit]

Hello Alex. In case of situations like this it is much more effective to instead add a {{Delete}} template directly to the page that should be deleted, rather than mentioning it in the edit summary of another page (even though the names of the pages might be very similar, as in this case). The reason is that a small note in an edit summary might get overlooked by us admins, since occasionally they are very plentiful and only seconds in between (see Special:RecentChanges).

In contrast, using the {{Delete}} template automatically adds a page to the much more sparsely populated Candidates for speedy deletion category. That category is more or less constantly being monitored, and anything showing up there is swiftly dealt with. Please also remember to always add a reason for your request, since it might not be obvious that – as in this case – the page Euops zimmermani should be deleted because it is a wrongly named version of Euops zimmermanni. For information on how to add such a reason, please see the {{Delete}} template.

–Happy editing! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:19, 6 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]