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 the 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! OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Volgens mij heb je je hier vergist. Onder species heb je bij Name Pelochelys cantorii ingevuld. Onder Name moet staan: Pelochelys signifera.
PeterR 18:32, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Ik heb mij inderdaad vergist. Heel erg bedankt voor het melden. Ik had ook nog een vraag: Weet jij hier iets over Talk:Equus onager?. Volgens mij klopt het namelijk niet wat er op wikispecies staat. Mvg, --Kennyannydenny 20:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
I do not currently know anything about the taxonomy of Equus, but one thing is clear: the page should NOT be deleted as the name is in use (see the links I put at the bottom of the page), and people are likely to search for it. I suggest we do nothing until we can sort the group out properly ... Stho002 21:02, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
- Alright. Thats fine by me. I was trying to solve this so that i can make an page about equus hemionus hemionus (mongolian wild ass) wich i wrote an article about on the Dutch wiki. But I'll just wait until this is solved. Greetings, --Kennyannydenny 09:08, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Je kunt Mesoclemmys dahli leeg maken en dan op de lege pagina zetten #Redirect Phrynops dahli. Als nu iemand Mesoclemmys dahli zoekt komt hij automatisch bij Phrynops dahli terecht. Je moet dan wel Mesoclemmys dahli als synonyms ivullen bij Phrynops dahli.
PeterR 09:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Bedankt voor de hulp. --Kennyannydenny 09:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- 1 probleem, Mesoclemmys dahli is de correcte naam en Phrynops dahli niet. Als ik nu Phrynops dahli wil hernoemen naar Mesoclemmys dahli kan dat niet. Is hier net zoals op de ned. wiki ook een pagina waar je een verzoek kan doen voor hernoeming door een moderator? --Kennyannydenny 09:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Weet je dat zeker. Zie www.helsinki.fi/.../history_Phrynops.html. Je ziet hier alle gegevens van de Phrynops schildpadden met subgenera.
PeterR 09:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
- Zo ver ik het zeker weet, bestaat het geslacht Phrynops natuurlijk nog, maar met nog maar 4 soorten. Veel soorten, waaronder deze zijn verplaatst naar andere geslachten. Ook deze pagina's van de reptile database hier en hier bevestigen wat ik weet. Mesoclemmys dahli is de correcte naam. Sommige sites zullen nog wel een synoniem gebruiken, maar zo ver ik weet klopt dit. --Kennyannydenny 19:45, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Kan jij mij uitleggen dat er allerlei links zijn in nl. wikipedia behalve naar species.wikipidia?
- Je bedoelt in artikelen zelf of op de hoofdpagina? Op de hoofdpagina van de nl wiki staat rechtsonder onder het kopje "Zusterprojecten" een link naar species. Dat links naar species op veel plekken niet in de artikelen over dieren en planten staan, komt omdat weinig gebruikers zich daar mee bezig houden en geen bot daarvoor aangestelt is (denk ik). Ik doe heel vaak links toevoegen naar species en commons, maar veel mensen doen dat niet, waarom niet weet ik ook niet. Groetjes, Kennyannydenny (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Taxon pages and templates to be disambiguated should use the name of the taxon's authority, rather than a group to which it belongs.
For one, higher taxa do change names from time to time, so any choice of higher taxon name is subject to change. Also the placement of taxa within larger groups changes, and so the name of the including taxon could be wrong following such a change, but the authority will not change. Additionally, there are situations where the same name may have been published more than once or may have been redefined with a different circumscription, yet remains within the same larger taxon. In these situations, it is quite possible for there to be more than one identical name for similar and overlapping taxa in the same larger group, and with only the authority being different. Wikispecies thus prefers that disambiguated taxa use the authority as part of the page name rather than a parenthetical larger taxon. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, i didn't know. But Lessonia Swainson now looks like a species name. Isn't it better to name it Lessonia (Swainson) then? --Kennyannydenny (talk) 10:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- The parentheses would imply that Swainson published the original name, which was modified by a later author. Parentheses after a taxon name have a particular meaning in taxonomy, so no, that would further confuse matters. The pagename "Lessonia Swainson" should not look like a species name, since the second element is neither Latinized nor lowercase. It should also be clear from the page content that Swainson is the taxonomic authority. --EncycloPetey (talk) 20:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
If you work on pages for South American fishes here, please remember that Carl H. Eigenmann's wife, Rosa Smith Eigenmann, also described fishes, so links to "Eigenmann" need to be piped so that they link to the correct Eigenmann. Koumz (talk) 00:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I know, but i don't always know which Eigenmann described the fish. I'll fix the link when i know. Kennyannydenny (talk) 18:41, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- I have already fixed all the links that exist now, so you just need to link correctly in the future. The best resource there is for names of fishes is Bill Eschmeyer's online Catalog of Fishes, and it will always give initials as well as the last name (and full reference information as well). That's how I found which Eigenmann to link to. FishBase also links to Catalog of Fishes pages for each fish if that is an easier way to find them. Koumz (talk)
The only other database I know of that provides the level of information that Catalog of Fishes does is Amphibian Species of the World for amphibians. The Reptile Database for reptiles is very good, but lacking in a few areas. Mammal Species of the World is good for a number of things, but not so good for the details of authors we are talking about. Koumz (talk) 20:45, 15 January 2013 (UTC)