User talk:LamBoet

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to Wikispecies![edit]

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:

If you have useful images to contribute to Wikispecies, please upload them at the Wikimedia Commons.

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 22:36, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Request for vote reg use of BASEPAGENAME[edit]

The previous discussions regarding if we should subst:ing BASEPAGENAME and change all [[BASEPAGENAME]] into [[susbt:BASEPAGENAME]] did not really reach a consensus.

Please vote here on the Village pump!

If you are not sure on your opinion, you can read and join the discussion about the claimed advantages and disadvantages of using BASEPAGENAME

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikispecies Oversighter[edit]

Wikispecies has no local Oversighter. Since I had the communitys confidence regarding the previous application for Checkusers rights, as per local Oversight policy on META, I hereby apply to get Oversighters user rights, as a request to the Wikispecies community.

Application is located at Requests for Comment.

Please also note that Oversighter actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Oversighters. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two oversighters, for mutual accountability. I don't want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for oversighters rights.

Dan Koehl through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:01, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Oversight nomination[edit]

Please refer to Wikispecies:Oversighters/Requests/Koavf for a second Oversight nomination. Note that we must have at least two Oversigthers in order for anyone to have these user rights. All feedback is welcome. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


original comment

Thanks for your comment, and well spotted. However, the original spelling of martinii is actually used by Allard on both the text and the accompanying plate. I have included links to both of these original pages. Also, Bridges suggests that there was an "incorrect original spelling", but without any justification. So there is need for a discussion regarding the validity/precedence of the original spelling as against current usage.My feeling is that original spellings are correct unless there are clear ambiguities in the original text, and that is not the case here. There is also a similar issue, oddly enough, with Kretania allardii which has had either spelling in the past, but seems settled on the -ii ending. We can discuss this further, but for the moment I feel it better to stay with Allard's original spelling of martinii until there is clearer resolution. Can you explain why the original spelling with double-i might be "incorrect"? We can no longer ask Mr. Allard!! Accassidy (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Accassidy: actually, Mr. Allard used the martini spelling at page 323, as the title of the description itself. That's why I wrote that both spellings are used in this original description: this is actually an ambiguity. According to Article 32.2.1 of the ICZN, in such a case, the correct original spelling is the one chosen by the first reviser. But I don't know who the first reviser is. I suspect that martini makes more sense since it is derived fron the name of "Mr. Emmanuel Martin", but this is probably not for us to decide. Unless we find more information, I think it is best that we follow the principle of least surprise, i.e. using martini. --LamBoet (talk) 09:43, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
About Kretania allardii: yes, I was aware of this; funny how such ambiguities reproduce. But this case seems a bit simpler, because only the allardii spelling is used in the original description (as far as I can see). --LamBoet (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
@Accassidy: Are you OK with this, and can you make the change, or shall I? Cheers --LamBoet (talk) 10:22, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
My referral to the first mention of the name is on page 314, but on further reading this is not actually a description. It just points to the description on page 319 which has the single "i" spelling. I'll change it around tomorrow. I don't feel that strongly either way. Accassidy (talk) 20:43, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Changes and explanation done. Further comments on my talk page if you wish. Would be good to have some info on your User page... Accassidy (talk) 09:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)


Correct. I have made some changes and enlarged the page a bit more. Still work in progress... Thanks. Accassidy (talk) 10:05, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Move of the Andrew Van Zandt Brower page[edit]

Hello LamBoet. Is the author name "Andrew Van Zandt Brower" incorrect, or did you have another reason for moving that page to "Andrew V.Z. Brower"? Please note that since many years back it's consensus and praxis on Wikispecies to always use the author's full name as page name, when known. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC).

Hi @Tommy Kronkvist:, I didn't move any page, I just redirected a duplicate page ("Andrew Van Zandt Brower") to the older, more complete page ("Andrew V.Z. Brower"). But by all means invert the redirect if the naming is not OK :-) Kind regards --LamBoet (talk) 18:09, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Oh... sorry. It may be that I'm getting waaaay to tired for editing. It's 20:22 in the evening here in Sweden and I've been coding and editing Wikimedia stuff since... well, yesterday. :-) The author's "main" page should be the one with the full name though, as per Wikispecies praxis – however I'll fix all that after I've brewed myself a bucket of coffee. ;-) Thank you for your contributions! Kindly, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:22, 13 June 2019 (UTC).

Taxonavigation templates.[edit]

Hi. I saw that you recently made an edit to the {{Hypermnestra}} template, adding italics to the genus name. That's of course very welcome, but I wish to offer a handy little hint. For genus (and subgenus) level taxa you can instead use the {{gbr}} template. It will automatically add italics to the taxon name, and then also the "<br/>" line break. So instead of writing for example:

Genus: ''[[Hypermnestra]]'' <br/>

you can instead enter:

Genus: {{gbr|Hypermnestra}}

Both versions will render the same result on screen. You can do the same for familia (and sub- + superfamilia), but then please use the {{fbr}} template instead. It works in exactly the same way, except it doesn't add italics.

  1. Use {{gbr}} for genera and subgenera, and {{fbr}} for familia, subfamilia, and superfamilia.
  2. Using any of these template isn't mandatory in any way, so you don't have to use them if you don't want to. However whether you use them or not, please always remember to add the two necessary categories to all Taxonavigation templates, e.g:
Genus: ''[[Hypermnestra]]'' <br/>

<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>
Genus: {{gbr|Hypermnestra}}

<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

–Best regards, –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:23, 9 July 2019 (UTC).

Hi @Tommy Kronkvist: OK, thank you for the advice! --LamBoet (talk) 23:50, 9 July 2019 (UTC)