User talk:Chris.Hoogendyk
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Stho002 in topic Serica grahami
Don't panic! I recreated the page without the subgenus in the page title (for technical reasons) ... Stho002 (talk) 01:31, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- That is a little bit problematic ... it is in general out of Wikispecies scope to keep track of patronyms, although I do it if the person for whom a species is named is either (1) a taxon authority (i.e. a namer of species themselves); or (2) a celebrity. If not either of these applies, then you are better off creating a page on Wikipedia, where you can say who the species was named after (providing it is stated in the publication) ... Stho002 (talk) 01:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- hmm ... out of scope, but sometimes ... so, would a prominent scholar of the last century who has one of the largest and most significant collections in the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution qualify? I mean, if you are a nerd, this is more of a celebrity than some silly movie star who is being chased by the paparazzi. Though, definitions of celebrity may differ widely from one person to another. Choogendyk (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- as I said, if you really want to state that the species was named after someone, then Wikipedia is the place to go. We have more limited scope here at Wikispecies, though we do what we do better than Wikipedia does ... Stho002 (talk) 02:14, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- hmm ... out of scope, but sometimes ... so, would a prominent scholar of the last century who has one of the largest and most significant collections in the National Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institution qualify? I mean, if you are a nerd, this is more of a celebrity than some silly movie star who is being chased by the paparazzi. Though, definitions of celebrity may differ widely from one person to another. Choogendyk (talk) 02:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)