User talk:Masmarieke
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Tommy Kronkvist
Thank you for creating or expanding the page 'Mátyás A. Bittenbinder'. However, we do not publish Wikipedia-like encyclopedia articles on this project, and so your contribution has been reverted (undone), rewritten, or nominated for deletion (or is already deleted). Please see our help pages (especially what Wikispecies is not), and see Roderic D.M. Page for an example of how we lay out pages on this project.. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:33, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I have supplemented factual truths for Mátyás Bittenbinder to make him more findable. What is the reason for removing this? Masmarieke (talk) 14:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Masmarieke. There are several reasons why the information you added was removed. Please note that Wikispecies is very different from the other sister projects at Wikimedia, especially in comparison to Wikipedia. While Wikipedia is a generally kept "all you can eat" encyclopaedia, Wikispecies is only a database for taxa, taxonomy, biological systematics, type repositories, and information about the authors and references needed to verify that data. Nothing else. We do not keep any data that is unrelated to biological taxonomy such as for example biographies, trivia, or bibliographies listing non-taxonomical literature. That kind of information is often very welcome at Wikipedia, but not here. In other words: Wikispecies always take on a much more scientific approach, while Wikipedia is more mainstream. For some more information regarding this, please read What Wikispecies is not.
- By the way this is common for most of the other Wikimedia wikis as well. You can compare it to for example Wikinews which only presents a lot of news, but no essays or trivia that are unrelated to news. Or Wikivoyage which only contains information relating to traveling and tourism, but no in-depth information about the politics, economics, history etc. of the described destinations. Again, that type of material is better suited for Wikipedia.
- Secondly, you wrote the Bittenbinder biographical information in Dutch, yet Wikispecies is supposed to be as language neutral as possible (as described on for example Meta-Wiki's page about Wikispecies). This is also different from Wikipedia: there are currently a total of 318 active, different language versions of Wikipedia, but Wikispecies only comes in one flavour and it's supposed to be language independent. And that's fine, since our taxonomy related pages aren't supposed to include bibliographies or other lengthy blocks of texts.
- In the end it all boils down to a community with several different sister projects that complement each other, rather than competes. For example Wikipedia is often great if you want to know what a particular animal looks like, what it feeds upon, what it sounds like, it's mating rituals and so forth – but if you need in-depth information about the species' taxonomy, biological systematics and nomenclature then Wikispecies is almost always more precise, better updated, and better referenced. Wikipedia may often show you a greater number of references, but the ones at Wikispecies tends to be more to-the-point.
–Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- In the end it all boils down to a community with several different sister projects that complement each other, rather than competes. For example Wikipedia is often great if you want to know what a particular animal looks like, what it feeds upon, what it sounds like, it's mating rituals and so forth – but if you need in-depth information about the species' taxonomy, biological systematics and nomenclature then Wikispecies is almost always more precise, better updated, and better referenced. Wikipedia may often show you a greater number of references, but the ones at Wikispecies tends to be more to-the-point.