User talk:Maculosae tegmine lyncis

From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 26 days ago by Maculosae tegmine lyncis in topic "HMG"
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Only one vernacular name per taxon, please


Hello Maculosae tegmine lyncis. Please note that as described in the "Usage" subsection of Wikispecies' guideline about Vernacular names, we should only include one, single vernacular name per language. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC).Reply

Hello, sorry, I had missed that; shall do so from now on (even if determining the best authority becomes harder); thank you for the notification, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 14:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)Reply



Hi again. Please add more data to the recently created J.A. McNamara-page, if you have access to it. I wasn't able to find any equivalent Wikidata item either, but that's most likely due to the lack of given name/praenomen for him/her, since there are literally thousands of of McNamaras listed at Wikidata. :-) Full name or at the very least scientific disciplines is most welcome, and should also be added to the McNamara disambiguation page. Thanks! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Hello, thanks for creating the disambiguation page (and for the localization assistance - more on its way in due course) - unfortunately though I can't find anything more. I found a long list of publications of a J A McNamara Jr, a specialist in teeth, but beyond that have drawn a blank, Maculosae tegmine lyncis 20:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist: Now at Q107118053. Possibly the James A. McNamara who co-authored this paper? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Maculosae tegmine lyncis: could you please share that list of publications; or rather, a link to it? Might be helpful in the search. If that's inconvenient sending the list by email to will also work.
@Andy: Could very well be. The paper printed 1997 and listed together with the BHL Creator ID also mentions an M.L. Augee (acknowledged on for example our Monotrematum sudamericanum and Obdurodon dicksoni taxon pages) but that paper may refer to a different McNamara since it doesn't explicitly say "James A.", only "J.A."
As for ResearchGate "James A. McNamara" is mentioned in 215 publications, and "James A. McNamara Jr." in thirteen. ORCID currently lists eight "James McNamara" altogether. Thank you both for your efforts, in either case. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC).Reply
[1] (and James A. McNamara) - but I think this is a red herring. Maculosae tegmine lyncis 23:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply



On another note, what is the best way to proceed with eg (Wondiwoi tree-kangaroo) Dendrolagus mayri and Dendrolagus dorianus mayri: MSW(2005) lists it as a subspecies, ICMW(2020) as a species (Don Ellis Wilson is one of the editors of both; I intend to produce a reference template for this new illustrated checklist as it's the most up-to-date universal reference); I have moved Wallabia kitcheneri to Congruus kitcheneri so could do the same - but should I leave a note or a question mark against the taxon in its old location? Should I remove Wallabia kitcheneri from Wallabia, or as there is a redirect is it best left as it is? Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis 23:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Also, eg Sarcophilus laniarius (Owen's Dasyurus laniarius) and Sarcophilus harrisii, where S. laniarius is either a separate species or "the same lineage that experienced dwarfism during the Pleistocene" [2], Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Using asterisks when calling templates


Just a short note and of no huge importance, but have a look at this diff if you want. Also consider the edit summary there, about asterisks. :-) Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Thanks/sorry, shall avoid/correct, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
No problem. Actually, my edit summary is a bit indistinct. It should say "The asterisks are included in the reference templates themselves (except for some rare exceptions were the template is sometimes supposed to be used within other templates, rather than be used alone."
Examples of such templates are {{ISBN}}, {{IUCN}} and {{ZooBank}}, to name a few. Those do not include a leading asterisk. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Note about D.G. Medway


I've recently created the author page David George Medway (1939–2013), using the {{Gill et al., 2010}} template you edited earlier today as a starting point. Even though he was a solicitor by trade rather than ornithologist, Medway published at least a hundred papers and works on the taxonomy and paleornithology of birds. Most of them were published in different New Zealand-based journals. I thought this information might be of value to you since you've created almost 40 new reference templates in just four days, many of them relating to birds. Happy editing! :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC),Reply

If I knew how to send one of those thank notices, I would (many times in fact by now), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
One can do that by clicking the "View history" tab (near the top of the screen, adjacent to the "Edit" tab) and then click the "thank" link next to the edit summary of the particular edit one wants to recognize. By using these revision history pages it's possible to send thanks also for very old edits. You can only send thanks one single time for any specific edit; after that the "thank" link will be replaced by the word "thanked", without a link. As far as I know it's not possible to reverse or "take back" a thanks either.
Note that (for whatever reason…) some users may have disabled the notification for thanks in their user preferences. You will still be able to thank them for their edits, but they will not be aware of it since they didn't receive any notification. Please also remember that all "thanks" are public and will show up in public logs – not that very many users ever read the logs, except for us admins… –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Phorusrhacidae incerti ordinis


Hi. Regarding Andrewsornis and for the sake of clarity, do you think we should mention the incerti ordinis status of Phorusrhacidae somewhere in the Taxonavigation section? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Hello, yes, that's certainly a good idea. I tried to add incerti ordinis at the end of the family line, but that did not work very well. If you are able to insert something appropriate to the Andrewsornis page, I can copy it across to the other genera/species; else, shall try something else (and thank you for the fix), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:48, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Have added Ordo: incerti ordinis, that seemed to work much better...Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 10:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Yep, that's usually how we do it. :-) FYI: I guess you already know this, but we never add "incertæ sedis", "incerti ordinis" etc. to the name of any taxon page, hence not to any taxon page links either. The reason is that the names of our taxon pages should always be equal to the actual taxon names. That being said, unfortunately we do have quite a lot of pages with incerti… etc. still in their names. The reason is that some years ago we had a small number of very prolific contributors who ignored this rule, and they managed to produce several hundreds of such pages until admins finally caught up and banned them (though most often they were banned for other, more severe reasons as well). The more experienced of us Wikispecies users tend to move/rename any such incertae page when we come across them, but it can be tricky since they are often transcluded or otherwise linked to by lots of other pages. It's a rather tedious and time-consuming process, but in the best of worlds the new links should be updated on all of the transcluded pages as well. Sooner or later we'll get there. If by chance you sometime happen to have an extraordinary amount of extra time on your hands, please feel free to help sort them out. :-) Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:43, 13 June 2021 (UTC).Reply
I think Template:Incertae sedis (Testudines) and Incertae sedis (Testudines) can now be deleted - they now each solely link to the other (Tools:What links here); if so, I'll pick the remainder up at a later date, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the notice. Both the taxon page and the template are now deleted (log 5293528 & log 5293529). As you pointed out they were only linked by each other (and by this talk page, of course). Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC).Reply
That makes complete sense to me, about not adding incertae ordinis etc. to the names; a pity about the prolific/banned users, I noticed someone who had set up many of the pages I've been looking at is now permanently blocked; stumbled upon Incertae sedis too, now begin to understand; would be interested in exploring these – I would have thought the multiple secundum option would be one way of demonstrating the taxon is incertae sedis, and adding genera dubia and genera excludenda (whether explicitly excluded or simply omitted from a complete discussion/list) might help help too. Unfortunately I'm on more than borrowed time, so once I have come to the point I can break off from the Phorusrhacidae in the next day or two, I'm unfortunately going to have to go cold turkey until mid-September, but if as welcome then as I have been made to feel now, I'll certainly be back, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 14:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

───────────────────────── Users who are eager to contribute in a positive and constructive way are always welcome, so no problem there! And taking some time off from editing is certainly not a problem either, since we're not on the clock here.

As a community we haven't yet got around to finalize any set policy or guideline for marking taxa as tricky/fishy/dubious or whatever. That's unfortunate but understandable since most users are way more interested in contributing hands-on to the taxonomy and nomenclature of taxa, rather than poking around with technicalities. We do have a set of templates created in order to help mark many of these special cases, but it's incomplete, seldom used, and then often in a non-standard way. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:41, 13 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

One possibility might be to update the gbr templates etc so that there is an indicator of certainty as one of the parameters, or eg to add a (repeatable) two-part "| vel | x |" parameter:
  • Genus: Anas → {gbr | Anas | vel | Sibirionetta} → "Genus: Anas vel Sibirionetta" (per the IOC it's now Sibirionetta, but there are many authorities)
  • Species: Anas formosa
That would work nicely for the Phorusrhacidae for sure, eg to give: "Ordo: Cariamiformes vel Gruiformes vel Ralliformes", etc, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
I've seen that you're using the {{gbr}} and {{fbr}} templates (named of course from "Genus/Familia with line BRake") within the Taxonavigation sections of taxon pages. That's not wrong, as such, but originally they were only meant to be used within Taxonavigation templates – e.g. {{Casuariinae}} – rather than directly within the taxon pages themselves. Hence using them together with vel and/or other such (multiple) distinguishers may invite misunderstandings. As you suggest it would work well on taxon pages, but if users start adding vel, incertae…, nom. prov. etc. to the taxonavigation templates then the situation may soon get out of hand. The reason for this is that each taxonavigation template can sometimes be used for a whole variety of different taxa, and not all of them share the same problematics or shortcomings (if any). Hence in some cases the added "extras" to the templates may simply be wrong. Good idea though – it's worth considering when the community is (again…) ready for it. However as always with templates there is a very real risk of overcomplicating things. Tommy Kronkvist (talk). 16:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC).Reply
I've added a subsection for conjunctions such as "and" & "or" to the list of translations; see here: Wikispecies:Localization#Commonly used conjunctions etc.Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:12, 18 June 2021 (UTC).Reply

Template:Taxa by author


Please use {{Taxa by author}}, as in this edit, in your good work. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:25, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, yes, thank you, also for fixing, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 19:15, 15 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Same publication?

Link to purge the browser cache for a specific Wikispecies page.

Hi. Do you now whether the publication referred to in the {{Phillips, 1935}} template is the same as the one referred to by the Wikidata item Q60138803? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC).Reply

Hello - I think {{Phillips, 1935}} is the subject of the review at DOI: 10.1038/137968a0 PDF that is the topic of Q60138803; I've created a new item and linked to the pre-existing one; but there's a slight lag so I can't link in the other direction yet as the new item is not recognized (though perhaps a bot completes reciprocal reviewed in / review of pairings). And as above, I really, really must stop until mid-September - perhaps at the weekend; am slightly addicted, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
I use the Bodleian+ catalogue quite often, as it's pretty good, and looks nice too - makes the British Library catalogue seem a little clunky, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for all of the above. The Bodleian+ catalogue looks good! By the way and as for lag, I guess you know that you can purge the server page cache for pages you're reading/editing in Wikispecies? There are several ways to do so, for example there is a "purge cache" link near the bottom of the "Page" dropdown menu near the top of the screen (see screenshot). Features likes this one are common in most of the Wikimedia sister projects, but can look or be placed a little different between projects. (And I think some of them must first be activated in your user preference settings.) –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC).Reply
Thank you - I have ticked the box in preferences, and now see that option; not really related and probably a more fundamental issue, but do you happen to know why sometimes links say from enwiki to jawiki don't show up in the sidebar, and you have to remove say the enwiki link from wikidata and re-add it? Is there a way to reset as if making a new connection, ?triggering the routine that makes them appear?, without doing this? (interval) PS, that purge cache function is excellent - it's just worked on the link from Felis chaus kutas to the right Commons category, where it initially appeared something more needed to be done; thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 23:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Daughter taxa of Felis chaus


Hi again. Since they aren't members of Felis, should Catolynx chaus, Lyncus chrysomelanotis, Lynchus erythrotus and Lynx ruppelii really be members of the Taxonavigation section of Felis chaus? Shouldn't they instead be listed in the "Name" section as synonyms, or something like that? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:53, 9 July 2021 (UTC).Reply

You may have detected a little uncertainty from my formatting (of course, as fixed, if one wishes to see what the C. is, one simply clicks on the link - thank you); in general, the nova et vetera nomina section is an attempt to assemble in one (convenient, easily navigable) place all names that have been used in relation to Felis chaus and/or its subspecies (leaving aside orthographic variants such as F. jacquemonti(i), which shouldn't cause too much confusion), so that if one accounts any of them, one can see what this is now understood to represent; this includes F. c. pallida, which apparently is in fact not Felis chaus at all, but F. bieti, so it's unclear whether this should have priority for inclusion over L. chrysomelanotis, which does in fact relate, but starts with L. instead of F.; it also wouldn't feature in a synonyms section (unless there was a separate "historic, not actually related synonyms"-section); apparently there are other issues with F./L. ruppelii (would one be included, not the other), to do with sensu or partim, which may be best addressed through a disambiguation page; already, there are three divisions, rather than simple alphabetical order (F. c. ... / F. ... / Other); ideally one would keep narrative to a minimum, but if one starts having lots of different sections (sensu etc) & different categories of name, or moving some names not others to the synonyms section (which might make a good addition (but, like Pocock, 1951, is largely addressed via the subspecies pages (valid taxa or not)), soon the ease-of-use benefits of one unified list would be lost; also apparently Lyncus chrysomelanotis is a synonym specifically of F. c. furax, so perhaps better included there, and followed there via a redirect; similarly, on the Felis page, the section includes tigers, which are no longer Felis as such; some initial thoughts..., Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
phew… Now that was a long sentence! But I get your point, so thanks. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:42, 9 July 2021 (UTC).Reply

Shōji Kobayashi


Hi Maculosae tegmine lyncis. In the {{Kobayashi et al., 1995}} template you recently created, is perhaps Shōji Kobayashi identical to Shuji Kobayashi? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC).Reply

Hello again - have tracked down the Japanese characters, and they're different, so I don't think so, but thanks for the pointer, have added the characters and CiNii ids to their wikispecies/wikidata pages (even if, from what I can make out, in some cases the same individual has more than one CiNii ID), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)Reply
Good work with all of the Japanese authors – both here and at Wikidata. Thank you! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:51, 11 September 2021 (UTC).Reply

Autopatrolled rights


Dear Maculosae tegmine lyncis, 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 autopatrolled use the autopatrolled user box on your user page. Copy and paste the following code on your user page: {{User Autopatrolled}}

If you have a Meta-Wiki user page, you can put the user box for Meta on your Meta-Wiki user page.

There's always a need of patrolling files edited by unregistered users, and if you think you have a good understanding of Wikispecies policies and guidelines and want to help out with patrolling, you can request patrol rights at Patroller.

Tommy Kronkvist (talk)‚ 09:35, 11 September 2021 (UTC).Reply

Publications tittles


Hi friend. Not very important, but times ago it was discussed and recommended to keep tittles as originally published. See this Gould article that you recently edited removing a capital letter on Birds. Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello, and thank you for letting me know—and for the template(s) in the first place; I tried a little search for this, but am more than happy to proceed as you say (adding italics and a/aut templates along the way), Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Alden H. Miller


I have moved the above to Alden Holmes Miller is that OK? Andyboorman (talk) 14:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

More than—thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 14:17, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Admins can do moves easily just ping me if needed. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Taxonavigation templates in reference templates


Hello again, Maculosae tegmine lyncis. Please do not add any Taxon linking templates such as {{glast}}, {{famlast}} or {{claduslast}} etc. to Taxonavigation templates, as you did in for example Template:Ornithodira. The "templates for linking taxa" templates (i.e. {{glast}} etc.) are only supposed to be used "as is" within the Taxonavigation sections on taxon pages (such as for example Ornithodira), and not within any other template. The reason is that this may otherwise lead to double line breaks, since users frequently and quite haphazardously adds <br> line break tags at the end of the taxon names and -templates in the Taxonavigation sections, and line breaks are also automatically addded by all {{...last}} templates. (There are other more techy reasons as well, but I'll leave them alone for now :-) Unfortunately it's poorly documented in our help pages and guidelines, but the praxis is to only add the {{glast}} type templates to Taxonavigation sections, and nowhere else.

Similarly, there are two exceptions that are only intended for taxon linking templates. These are the {{gbr}} and {{fbr}} templates. They also add a line break: hence the "br" in their names. The {{gbr}} template is intended exclusively for subgenus- and genus level taxa (it adds italics to the taxon name), while the {{fbr}} template is intended for subfamily, superfamily and family taxa (it does not add italics). You can see examples of their use in the Template:Homo and Template:Hominidae templates, respectively.

I know that this isn't all clear cut and crisp clear, but there you are... We really need to get our help- and guideline pages up to par. That takes time though, since most users are only here to contribute to the taxonomy side of things (which is good enough!) and rather few ever deals with the "wiki" parts. Anyway, I'm here for you, should you have any questions or suggestions! Also, don't worry about the templates where you've already added the wrong templates, as per above. I'll have them sorted in a day or two. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 05:41, 18 February 2022 (UTC).Reply

I now see that you used the {{gbr}} template already in June last year, namely when you created Template:Miracinonyx. Good work! Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 05:59, 18 February 2022 (UTC).Reply
Hello again - and thank you!Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Before I amend the templates to [[]]<​br​>, can I just check there is no appetite (?for me?) to create similar obr & cbr templates, for ordo & cladus? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 17:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
I have gone ahead and created Template:Obr and Template:Cbr (they can always be deleted again if needs be), and they're in use at Template:Gaviiformes and Template:Tyrannoraptora. The results (on Gaviidae and Tyrannoraptora) look like they are working properly. Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Also, do you know of a way that a taxonav equivalent function could be employed on eg Palaeognathae, so that Template:Palaeognathae can be used on that page rather than its parent template (taxonav employed on the page against Template:Neornithes), but delivering the same result? Otherwise the list is a bit unwelcoming, if one uses Template:Palaeognathae on the page without an in-page use of taxonav, thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Ideally, making changes that may lead to structural changes (such as the {{Obr}} and {{Cbr}} templates) should first be discussed at the Village Pump ("VP"), however in this case I think it's okay. Later today I'll make a note about the new templates at the VP in order to inform our users.
Using several instances of the {{Taxonav}} template is trickier, since duplicate {{Taxonav}} templates in the same "taxon tree" may lead to a so called "Template loop" which creates error messages from the server software. Unfortunately we already have a few of these, due to malformed Taxonavigation templates. Click the "Expand" link in the Taxonavigation sections of Angulosaccus tenuis for an example of the red warning text. I've been working on a means to overcome this, but haven't come up with any good solution yet. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC).Reply
I now see that you've already started a thread about the new {{Obr/Cbr}} templates at the Pump. Good work. :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC).Reply
Just as an example, here's a fairly common case where the combination of {{glast}} and <br> tags would of course cause a double line break (prior to my fix): Template:Ohbayashia diff. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:21, 23 February 2022 (UTC).Reply

────────── @Tommy Kronkvist: Please could I have your views on Wikispecies:Sandbox (which calls on {{Template:Sandbox2}}) as a possible way round this issue, thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 16:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

I will, but most likely haven't got time for it before Sunday or more likely Monday. From tomorrow morning I'm on the road, visiting an old relative or mine. (I've copied the code to one of my own sandboxes, just in case the public sandbox is purged before I have time to properly read your contribution/suggestion. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:54, 4 March 2022 (UTC).Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist: as and when you do, there have been some changes/improvements (plus I was encountering specifically sandbox-related issues, so have created some dummy pages..). ZZZ now shows the result, drawing on a proposed
Taxonavigation: [[{{{1}}}  ]]
(tested at {{Taxonav3}}) and {{ZZZ}} (which also draws on {{ZZZ2}}); in terms of editing the taxon page, all that would be needed would be to apply {{Taxonav2}} and, when editing the taxon template eg/as at {{ZZZ}}, to copy the upper lines down to the "summary" section (assuming no change to {{ZZZ2}} or equivalent); we might want to agree the content of/approach to {{ZZZ2}}, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 12:05, 5 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
P.S. ZZZZ (and {{ZZZZ}}) seem to show that there are no untoward consequences further down the chain, eg/ie when {{ZZZZ}} calls on {{ZZZ}}, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:06, 5 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
P.P.S. sorry I couldn't wait/resist, and have just raised this at the Village Pump, hope that's ok/you don't mind; thank you as always, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:43, 5 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist:: Hello, unfortunately there was an error (I have reverted the affected pages) that I only discovered after implementation, with summary taxonomies repeated in the dropdown box when taxonav or taxonav2 was applied on a lower taxon page (I tried to test for this via ZZZZ as well as ZZZ, to ensure no knock-on effects lower down, but somehow failed to generate the right scenario). I think there may be a solution using en:Template:Excerpt (initial testing here in the enwiki sandbox looks promising, in that you can exclude or only transclude specified templates). Apparently Template:Excerpt uses the Lua Module en:Module:Excerpt, which I don't think has been copied across to wikispecies. Can I go ahead and copy it or is this something that, if done, should be done by you or another of the administrators? It looks like that module depends on a couple of others, so ?I? may need to copy those across too. Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 18:53, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
I'm currently the only Interface administrator at Wikispecies and it wouldn't be a problem for me to import all the relevant modules and templates. However the next few days I'm quite busy IRL and will probably not have the time to look through all of the necessary files and their dependencies until perhaps Thursday or in worst case even Friday. I would also like to compare the English Wikipedia template and module you refer to with their respective MediaWiki Template:Excerpt, MediaWiki Module:Excerpt and Meta-Wiki Module:Excerpt counterparts, before making a decision which ones of them to import.
When all of those checks are made a file import is often much more convenient than copying the code from a sister project and then manually inserting it to new Wikispecies files, since an import can automatically (and in one go) also include all necessary other files that the template/module depends on. Checking the dependensies first is important though, or we might end up with a whole bunch of automatically imported but superfluous and unnecessary files as well. (Please see Wikispecies:Importers and Wikispecies:Transwiki importers and their links if you're interested in the details.)
However as I said this may take me a few days for me, due to non-wiki related stuff I need to deal with first. Feel free to discuss the matter with any of our other "officials" if you can't wait! :-) For a task like this I would recommend either User:DannyS712 or User:Koavf, or perhaps someone of our bureaucrats. By the way all of our admins and bureaucrats have transwiki import rights, but none of our other users do. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC).Reply
More than happy to wait a week or two, thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 20:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
I can take a crack at importing - to be clear, you want to be able to use enwiki's excerpt template here, along with all of the modules it depends on? Some of those are already available here, so its not as simple as just importing with all of the dependencies as well, but it should be doable. I will probably have time later today or tomorrow. DannyS712 (talk) 21:46, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Thanks very much, but I may have found a way to do this with what we already have; can I get back to you if this is in fact needed? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:49, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Sure DannyS712 (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
@DannyS712: Hello again, I was wondering if I could take you up on your offer of import assistance — but (for these purposes) of en:Module:Transcluder instead.
What I have been trying to do is to transclude the same template twice on one page, once excluding content within <section begin=xxx/> ... <section end=xxx/>‎‎, and once only including that same content; while this is working on that particular page, the content within this mark-up is also being transcluded elsewhere. If, instead, as tested at enwiki here and here, the content is marked-up in the format <section><section begin=summarytaxa/>‎ ... <section end=summarytaxa/>‎</section>, then content within the <section> ... </section> is excluded from standard transclusion but can be specially transcluded via Module:Transcluder. It may be that this is otherwise achievable with what we already have, but I have been unable to stumble upon the solution. I believe this will get us closer to a solution. Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:15, 9 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
P.S. hopefully in time, in relation to this item at the Village Pump, we may need a mechanism to transclude sections of taxon pages that are marked up via the template {{VN}}; it looks from my current understanding like en:Template:Excerpt could be useful for this, but there is absolutely no need for en:Module:Excerpt to be imported in the immediate future for this particular purpose. Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Speedy deletion requests


No issue with the requests please though make sure that any sub pages, ie genera when listing a family, have been moved or proposed for deletion also whichever is relevant. Also if there are blue links on the page I need a little more explanation, ie include what the plan is for the blue links as I do not want to create orphan pages. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 22:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, for each of the requests I have transferred any genera listed to the family and checked that no pages link to the to-be-deleted page; for instance, Incertae sedis (Thomisidae), there are genera in blue, but Incertae sedis (Thomisidae) itself has no links to it (which can be verified via "What links here" in the left margin of the page), and eg Ansiea is (1) transferred to a "genera incertae sedis" section on the Thomisidae family page and; (2) links itself to the Thomisidae family page; so I don't think there should be undesirable effects such as orphaned pages; thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 22:55, 21 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Faendalimas: I verified all of the above, and have now deleted the eight incertae sedis pages and -templates. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC).Reply

Placement of categories


Hello. I see that you have made several edits to Taxonavigation templates adding "Summary for taxonav2 functionality", as for example in this Eusaurischia template edit where the code now looks like this:

Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly><!-- for {{Taxonav2}} --><section>{{#ifeq:{{{1|keyword}}}|summary|<section begin=summarytaxa/>‎{{TaxonavDinosauria}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Saurischia}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}<section end=summarytaxa/>}}‎</section>

Shouldn't the categories go last in the code, since this is pretty much standard in all of Wikimedia? In other words, shouldn't it look like this, with the <noinclude> and <includonly> tags moved to the bottom:

Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}
<!-- for {{Taxonav2}} --><section>{{#ifeq:{{{1|keyword}}}|summary|<section begin=summarytaxa/>‎{{TaxonavDinosauria}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Saurischia}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}<section end=summarytaxa/>}}‎</section>
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:55, 22 March 2022 (UTC).Reply

Aaagh, I see what you mean and fear you may be right; that's why I held off a bit before getting going, to give the eagle-eyed a chance (neornithes pretty much complete, though there may be some superfamilies and clades outstanding, mammalia just a handful to go, ornithischia done I think); I have never used any of the automated category-related tools, I'm guessing they cant help here? Otherwise, perhaps this could be something that might be done from now on, rather than revisiting several hundred edits, as functionality is not affected... Also, it is very sensitive re spaces, I tried as above, but this added a gap after Eusaurischia in the expand/collapse box for Giraffatitan. It would have to be:
Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}<!-- for {{Taxonav2}} --><section>{{#ifeq:{{{1|keyword}}}|summary|<section begin=summarytaxa/>‎{{TaxonavDinosauria}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Saurischia}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}<section end=summarytaxa/>}}‎</section>
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

Thank you for highlighting, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 20:45, 22 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

While your version above is the cleanest/clearest and most legibile in terms of the code, I have just tried various combinations, including, via a/my sandbox, where the spacing/line breaks in the taxonav2 template are changed, and cannot generate the right result on both the taxon page and downstream of the taxon page through this format. It might be possible were we also to replace (some of the) cbr(s) with square brackets, but that would then require inconsistencies on and across taxon templates in terms of how to wrap the taxon names, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 04:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Okay, thanks for the information. I've been offline for a few days (up until yesterday), so I might have missed some details on what's been going on in the community. :-) Hence:
  1. has there been a discussion within the community about and – more importantly – is there a community consensus that we should in fact use this {{Taxonav2}} template? If so, could you please add a link to those talks?
  2. we shouldn't leave several hundreds of pages with one (or more) non-standard formats: the templates are complex enough as it is, and mixing standards makes it even harder for new users to understand how the system works. However, if all the formalities with community consensus etc. is in order I can probably run a bot to fix all the inconsistencies semi-automatically. That would be a lot quicker and less tedious than doing it manually, however we should of course try to find a 100% working format first since there's no point in running a bot to change a non-standard format into another non-standard format...
All the best, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 07:08, 23 March 2022 (UTC).Reply

Well, re (1), the Village Pump discussion/soliloquy is here. I left a week after the demo pages there noted (a further week after the proposal was aired), and there have been 0 objections (I have been using your OCLC template which was met with similarly rapturous acclaim by the way, thank you; clearly people don't want to be met with a huge long list, sufficiently so even to develop and deploy taxonav in the first place, though this sadly has usage constraints as above (I could have simply added to taxonav, but I think this is clearer as the way it is used is a little different)). Also, User:Hector Bottai, who's the most active on the Aves-front as far as I can see, in this Village Pump item, explicitly said the summary Aves down list of ranks as on Phoenicopteriformes is "fine", just wishes the mobile view would support taxonav/taxonav2/the "collapse" function in general. Having rolled this out across the bird orders, and now I can properly see what these pages are about, I have gone through the orders adding a primary reference, drawing in particularly on the Brodkorb catalogues of fossil birds for these. I'm intending to do the same now for mammals (Perissodactyla already done...; lots of non-standard taxon lists fixed in the process of adding taxonav2), thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 09:16, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Re (2), if we remove the section tags, this works (as at {{Eusaurischia}}, Eusaurischia (and downstream at Giraffatitan, Sphenisciformes, etc):

Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}
<!-- for {{Taxonav2}} -->{{#ifeq:{{{1}}}|summary|<section begin=summarytaxa/>‎{{TaxonavDinosauria}}
Ordo: {{obr|Saurischia}}
Cladus: {{cbr|Eusaurischia}}<section end=summarytaxa/>}}
<noinclude>[[Category:Taxonavigation templates]]</noinclude>
<includeonly>[[Category:Pages with taxonavigation templates]]</includeonly>

This is the shortest, easiest to read, and has the categories in the right place. The "summarytaxa" section is only drawn on through the use of the keyword "summary" as the third parameter when using {{Taxonav2}} — when producing the full collapsible table of ranks, there is no keyword "summary" so as to trigger/include the "summarytaxa" section above — so while the #ifeq: above helps belt & brace what was previously wrapped in <section>, <section> had little benefit, probably not even clarity, so is redundant (and for these purposes troublesome) and can be removed. If you have no objections to the layout as above, I'll manually go through and adjust, there are just under two hundred uses I think so it shouldn't be too bad, thank you very much for the input/prod, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

PS I have "fixed" a handful in the chain down to Sphenisciformes; there was a strange artefact, some kind of hidden space, in {{Aves}} and {{Neognathae}} that was adding an extra space in the dropdown box after those lines in this format, which was not in {{Eusaurischia}} or {{Aequornithes}}, which were then behaving differently without a space after these lines in the dropdown box, but now no longer! Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 11:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I have gone down (or in fact up) the list of templates updated for this functionality, and have amended as above; thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply



Hi! I don't know if this would be of any interest to you considering the discussion about "HMG" at Village Pump back in 2021, but I have just moved HMG (Glasgow) to HMUG. I based this on Evenhuis's list at [3], as well as the fact Template:Staines, 2003 uses the same abbreviation. I checked all the species pages currently in the corresponding category, and the sources either don't use *any* abbreviation for the Hunterian Museum (e.g. here for Eucosma parvulana), or they use HMAG for "Hunterian Museum and Art Gallery" (e.g. Template:Zolotuhin, 2018). None of them used "HMG" for the Museum at all, so I suspect that this abbreviation for the Hunterian Museum may have been made up for the purposes of Wikispecies rather than being taken from a publication.

This also raises the question of whether HMG (Hobetsu) actually doesn't need a disambiguator after all, maybe it can be simply be "HMG"?? Monster Iestyn (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, and thanks, the one I checked (this PDF) has HMUG = "Hunterian Museum, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK"; I have requested the deletion of HMG so that HMG (Hobetsu) can be moved in, now this disambiguation is no longer needed, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 21:44, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply