User talk:PeterR

From Wikispecies
Jump to: navigation, search

There are archives of this talk page:
Archive 2008 – 1   Archive 2008 – 2
Archive 2009   Archive 2010
Archive 2011   Archive 2012
Archive 2013   Archive 2014
Archive 2015   Archive 2016
The archives are searchable:

Updating ISBN's[edit]

OK I may have over-reacted slightly, and I've struck part of my comments on my talk page.

The update being made was technical in nature in that an ISBN in plain format won't necessarily be converted into a link automatically after some time after 2017. The technical update was to convert these magic links into explicit template calls.

I can understand your concerns when you see a lot of (unexpected) edits though. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

It is ok, but don't update the ZT numbers PeterR (talk) 18:18, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't plan on changing those templates myself (and the updating would be limited to the ISBN numbers ONLY.) given the concerns you expressed. However as I said above at some point the magic conversion may stop working. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok. you can help it. PeterR (talk) 18:32, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Vraag[edit]

Category:Reference templates Why are you removing this category? Was it an accident? —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Why not. It is not after our agreements. I update my own Reference templates and from Sthoner after our agreements. PeterR (talk) 07:45, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Navigation It makes it harder to find the templates and it puts them on a report for Special:UncategorizedTemplates. Please continue adding the category and not removing it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
I go every time to the author to search if a template for his article exist. The author page have the first priority for searching references templates. Therefore must every reference template add in the author page. You have to fill the reference templates with the full author names. Thats the agreement. This category is made by Sthoner without comunication. PeterR (talk) 17:48, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Author pages Of course, add the templates themselves to author pages. But also please add them to categories as well so that 1.) this maintenance page is emptied and 2.) so other users can navigate all of the reference templates. The latter is also helpful in case someone needs to do maintenance across a lot of templates (for instance, adding {{ISBN}} to the ISBN magic links). Everything other than the root category should be categorized. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
I can't find in the agreement of reference template to add ISBN but only ISSN numbers. So show me the agreement for ISBN. PeterR (talk) 11:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
ISBNs If you don't want to add ISBNs, then don't. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:26, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Walsingham[edit]

This discussion started here.

Peter, Thomas de Grey Walsingham was the 6th baron of that name and lived 1843-1919. There is a bibliography for him here. The only paper that comes up under a search for The Lord Walsingham is from 1919. There is nothing outside this date range. I am confident that these are the same person, as the son and grandson of Thomas were John and George. Thomas is the only one alive in 1919 that has any publications in Lepidoptera. Where it says "Lord Walsingham M.A." the "M.A." refers to a degree of Master of Arts - which is consequent to graduating from Cambridge University where he was a member of Trinity College (which is, by a strange coincidence, where I did my degree also). Details of him here. Accassidy (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

I have put in the web links that should have been there earlier!! Accassidy (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation's current work, not long-term strategy.
  2. Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA, USA, 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

Ennomomima is invalid[edit]

Please look at Ennomomima - it is a synonym of Zatrephes (see reference at the bottom). Mariusm (talk) 05:42, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Marius. I shall fix it. PeterR (talk) 08:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)



Types[edit]

Peter,

Rothschild describes both male and female of carmesina here. This would be a good reference to add to the species page. He doesn't say "holotype" or "allotype", but the male comes first. If the BMNH has a series of males, as seems likely from the new paper, but only one has a "Type" label, then I think it is fair to describe these as "Holotype ♂ + Syntype ♂♂" and so on. Also, I would delete all the text on the Automolis carmesina page and just reduce it to a Redirect for Zatrephes carmesina.

Alan Accassidy (talk) 13:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Confusing deletion[edit]

Template:Zt3777.1.1 This has over 100 transclusions--why did you delete it? —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Because this reference template is not after our agreements. I Have made a new one after our agreements. If I update species or genera, I update the reference templates to. PeterR (talk) 06:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Template agreements I'm still a little confused: did you remake it already? If so, I will replace the old template with the new one to clear out all of these redlinks. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
      • I'm not a programmer. So I have done nothing. If you want known more ask Mariusm. PeterR (talk) 17:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC).
        • First you say "I have made a new one", and then you say "I'm not a programmer. So I have done nothing." How can you both make a new template, and also not make a new template?? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 01:53, 17 January 2017 (UTC).
          • Peter, when you change a template's name which is used in many pages, please leave a REDIRECT on the old name. Mariusm (talk) 07:31, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
            • Marius, normal I do this, may be I have forgotten it to do with this one. He could sent me a list for updating. PeterR (talk) 07:45, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
        • On 18 july 2015 i have make a new one for Zt3777.1.1 namely Yang, Wang & Li, 2015. I have replace the new template by the species. See Edosa bicolor . total 24 pieces. PeterR (talk) 05:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
          • Tommy, you restore the template Zt3777.1.1. Thats against our policy. What is the real problem. I don't understand koavf with over 100 transclusions. PeterR (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I am sorry for my late response. The problem is that you deleted the template named "Zt3777.1.1". The template is used on more than 100 pages (see here.) As a result there are "red links" to the template on all of those 100 pages, which is not good. That is why I restored the template. I then moved the template to the new name, {{Yang, Wang & Li, 2014}}. Moving a page changes the name of the page, but it also automatically creates a redirect from the old name to the new name (see here.)

The final result is that the name of the template is now correct, and there are zero red links to the old name. That is how you should have done it: instead of deleting the template, you should have moved it to the correct name. Please see Hilfe:Seite verschieben on the German Wikipedia for information on how to move pages. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:31, 21 January 2017 (UTC).

I still don't understand it. I have made already more then 50 replacement names for Zt reference templates, without trouble. Why give this trouble. If I get a list where I have forgotten to replace ZT3777.1.1 , I can do this replacement. PeterR (talk) 17:35, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
As I mentioned earlier, the {{Zt3777.1.1}} template is used on more than 100 pages, and a list of them can be seen here: Pages that link to "Template:Zt3777.1.1". If you want to you can change all of the {{Zt3777.1.1}} links on all of those pages into {{Yang, Wang & Li, 2014}}. However that is not necessary, since I have made an automatic redirect from {{Zt3777.1.1}} to {{Yang, Wang & Li, 2014}}, as you can see here.
Unfortunately many of the "Zt" templates you have deleted are still used on many pages, without redirects. Now there are red "Zt" links on those pages, instead of the templates. A few examples can be seen on these pages:
Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:12, 21 January 2017 (UTC).
If you need a thorough explanation about redirects and redirect pages, please se Wikipedia:Weiterleitung in the German Wikipedia. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC).

Please don't include the (Subgenus) in the page-names[edit]

Peter, I thought we agreed a long time ago not to add the (Subgenus) to the species page-name. This causes so many pages to be incompatible with one another. We want our database to be standardized and our standard is Genus species. In the page itself you can add the Subgenus without problems; you can also redirect if you wish. I deleted many pages with Genus (Subgenus) species so why have you started now to make them again? Please be reasonable and conform to WS standard. Mariusm (talk) 12:33, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Marius, We have discussed this already. If there are new genera or species or subspecies with subgenera we can add those. If you add author taxa and museum you take the official combination. I know you don't like that, but I want to add the species or subspecies after official bulletins. There are genera with subgenera with only species with subgenera, so there are no old species transferred to them. I'm a little bit tired over all the discussions. For instance ZT3777.1.1. I have make a new one after our agreements and replace Zt3777.1.1 through the new one via authored taxa. What Kronkvist have done I don't understand it. I see a lot of new contributions also with subgenera. Every body here is doing his own thing. PeterR (talk) 12:56, 18 January 2017 (UTC) I have send this to Koavf: On 18 july 2015 i have make a new one for Zt3777.1.1 namely Yang, Wang & Li, 2014. I have replace the new template by the species. See Edosa bicolor . total 24 pieces.
Peter, I can't agree with your argument about "official combination". You can add the "official combination" in the species data. See for example a page I made: Zyras prudens. in the data I specify "Subgenus: Zyras (Cephalodonia)", isn't that enough to satisfy you? I'm talking only about the "name of the page" not about the data included. Mariusm (talk) 13:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
In this case I add the data by Cephalodonia prudens, because this is the original combination. After that I transferred it to the current status with subgenus. If you like I can show you by this species. PeterR (talk) 13:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC).
I understand you perfectly, you don't have to show me. What I say is only this: write the data exactly as you wish - ONLY make the name of the page in the format Genus species. Mariusm (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
I shall try an other experiment. If it works its ok. I try to find a compromise for original species with subgenera). PeterR (talk) 13:56, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
You get only the original combination with the full text in the species. I'm sorry, but there is no other way. PeterR (talk) 17:31, 18 January 2017 (UTC).
Here an example of new contributions: Trachys reitteri. I see many more from others. Is there no control anymore? PeterR (talk) 13:35, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Polyommatus schuriani attalaensis[edit]

Peter, I have made a small revision to that page to remove the obvious inconsistency. Thankyou for pointing it out. If we take Tshikolovets 2011 as the current authority then Agrodiaetus has only sub-Genus status. There is a lot of catching up to do in Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus). I may get back to that when I tire of the current work I am doing on African Poritiinae. Alan. Accassidy (talk) 11:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Peter, Parnassius is in Papilionidae, while Agrodiaetus is in Lycaenidae. "Parnassius (Agrodiaetus)" makes no sense to me. Surely it is Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus). All the taxa under Agrodiaetus should be done as you have with Polyommatus yurinekrutenko. Thanks. Alan Accassidy (talk) 12:23, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Application for Checkuser[edit]

Referring to earlier discussions regarding a local Checkuser policy, I herebye apply to get Checkuser user rights, although we havnt reached a consensus reg Checkuser policy, but I want to give it a try if I can get the required votes. For a request to succeed a minimum of 25 support votes and an 80% positive vote are required (subject to the normal bureaucrat discretion). Requests for checkuser run for two weeks, and I ask kindly that somone starts the poll, like we do for adminship applications.

Please also note that CheckUser actions are logged, but for privacy reasons the logs are only visible to other Checkusers. Because of this, Wikispecies must always have no fewer than two checkusers, for mutual accountability. I dont want to suggest anyone, but hope that someone feel inspired and will step forward and also apply for checkuser.

My request to the Wikispecies community is here

Dan Koehl (talk) 01:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Another application for Check User[edit]

As pointed out above by User:Dan Koehl, we need at least two Check Users for this wiki. I am nominating myself and would be happy to receive any feedback that you have to give (positive, negative, or neutral). Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Koavf. Thanks. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Additional Checkuser Application[edit]

I also have added my name to those willing to be a checkuser. Please see my application here Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Faendalimas. I listed this yeasterday but have been encouraged to do a mass mail. I would also take the opportunity to make sure everyone knows that any editor can vote but that it is imperative that as many do as possible, for all 4 of the current applicants, please have your say. Checkuser voting has strict policy rules regarding number of votes. You will have other messages from the other Users concerned you can also read about it in the discussion on the Village Pump - Wikispecies:Village_Pump#Application_for_Checkuser. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Standing for role of checkUser[edit]

Like some of our colleagues (who I support), I am offering to serve as a checkuser, not least to ensure adequate coverage in case one of the others is unavailable.

Please comment at Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Pigsonthewing.

[Apologies if you receive a duplicate notification; I wasn't aware of Wikispecies:Mail list/active users, and sent my original notification to the list of administrators instead.] MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

RFC on Checkusers[edit]

With one week to go I wanted to remind everyone of the importance of voting on the current CheckUser applications. They can all be found together on a single RFC: Wikispecies:Requests_for_Comment#Checkusers.

It is extremely important with votes such as this for everyone to be involved. There are strict rules in the Wikimedia Foundation Policy guidelines on these votes. I would urge people to have a good understanding of what a CheckUser does. This can be read up on here on the page discussing CheckUser's Wikispecies:Checkusers. Links on this page will take you to other policy information on Meta, HowTo for our site etc.

I would also urge people to look at our own policy development and some past discussion on this can be found here: Wikispecies_talk:Local_policies#Local_CU_Policy.

Wikispecies has in the past had issues that has required the intervention that is supported by the ability to do a CheckUser. Many of us are aware of this. The capacity to do this ourselves greatly speeds up this process. Although SockPuppetry can sometimes be identified without using a CheckUser in order to do the necessary steps to stop it or even prevent it requires evidence. We all know that sockpupets can do significant damage.

This is an important step for Wikispecies. It is a clear demonstration we can run ourselves as a Wiki Project part of Wiki Media Foundation. When I and several others first discussed this we knew it would be difficult at the time to meet all the criteria. We have only now decided to try and get this feature included in Wikispecies. By doing this it can lead to other areas where Wikispecies can further develop its own policies. In some areas we have unique needs, different to the other Wiki's. It is timely we were able to develop all these policies.

Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 4 February 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)

Hallo Peter, danke fur dein kommentar bei Abstimmung von PAGENAME, du hast aber kein direktes Wahl gemacht, nur ein Diskussions Kommentar? Möchtest du dein der Stimme enthalten? Falls nicht, Könntest du ach bitte, dein Wahl einfügen? Schöne grüsse, Dan Koehl (talk) 14:12, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Neozephyrus uedai kachinicus[edit]

@PeterR: Peter, in Koiwaya, 2007, this taxon is given as kachinus not kachinicus. I do not have access to the original 2002 paper. Can you double check the original spelling, as clearly one form of the name must be wrong. Alan. Accassidy (talk) 13:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

    • Alan, The original description is Neozephyrus uedai kachinicus. This subspecies is described in Gekkan-Mushi, 381 page 8 in japanese and page 12 in english, 2002.
Secondly, you have created pages for suroia Tytler and its subspecies under Chrysozephyrus, with reference dates up to 2003. Koiwaya, 2007, p.184, has this species in Neozephyrus, so I think it should be moved. Have you any reference later than 2007 retaining the binomial Chrysozephyrus suroia?. Accassidy (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
    • Alan, I don't know. I have the information from funet. If I ask on internet for Chrysozephyrus, I find a lot of publications. So, I don't know whart is wright. PeterR (talk) 17:36, 22 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)

Link to PDF file no longer works[edit]

Hello PeterR. You have created the Zygaena (Zygaena) rhadamanthus page. Thank you for that! Now, a few years later, the link to the PDF reference does not work anymore. Do you perhaps have a new link instead? If you do, can you please add it? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:09, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

Fixed it. ;) --Succu (talk) 19:15, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. I fixed it too. ;-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC).

Template:Zt3704.1.1[edit]

Hello, you deleted the template [[Template:Zt3704.1.1]], because you wrote a new template instead. Deleting this template causes 20 pages with red links now! PLEASE stop deleting templates, which are used by other pages. Always check the special page "What links here". PLEASE do not delete the template, but redirect it to the new template. For other users, who want to repair the red links (like me) it is very difficult sometimes to find out the name of the new template. Bedankt! --Murma174 (talk) 08:15, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

P.S. Same with [[Template:Zt3613.176]] --Murma174 (talk) 08:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
All done PeterR (talk) 08:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your quick reaction! --Murma174 (talk) 09:30, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Move[edit]

Hi Peter,
during the last days I checked your deletion log (back to Dec., 01 2016) and found a bunch of deleted templates, which are used by other pages. These are resolved now back to Dec., 01 2016. I will continue this check in the next days.

Many of these problems come up, when you write a new template to replace a Zootaxa or a reference template. Have you ever tried the 'Move'-function of our editor interface? You find it in the upper right corner of every page, left of the search field. Just click on 'More' and then on 'Move'. Give the Zt ore reference template a good new name and that's it. You will never again produce redlinks! This is much easier for you.

All the best --Murma174 (talk) 10:44, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, PeterR (talk) 10:58, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Update: Check done back to Feb 01 2016 Dec 31 2015 now. --Murma174 (talk) 15:38, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Template:Yang, 2015a[edit]

Peter,
I'd really like to know, why you are continuing in your old habits: Template:Yang, 2015a
Redlinks now after Special Page: What links here in these pages:

--Murma174 (talk) 07:50, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

The template:Yang was wrong had to be Lang. Had make a new one for Lang, 2015a and delete Yang, 2015a. Had to go to hospital for attest and after that, I forgot to update. PeterR (talk) 10:08, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply, Peter! You don't need to apologize. It would help a lot, if you could try to use the Move-function. --Murma174 (talk) 10:24, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Albodikra or Aldodikra[edit]

Hi Peter! You created the new genus Albodikra and the new species Aldodikra bifida with a different spelled genus name. Which genus name is correct? --Succu (talk) 16:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. It is Albodikra. PeterR (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Subgenus[edit]

Please, please stop putting on subgenera to Bembidion. You're making things more difficult to sort out. This isn't right and it isn't what we've decided to do. I beg you to leave Bembidion alone and not to mess with it any more. Mariusm (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Its all ready a big mess. I only add the original combinations after original bulletins. It have all the status valid. What you are doing have all the status invalid. We had this discussion before and you know that we have to add the original combination for author taxa and museum. At the time we decided to work without subgenera, we didn't had author taxa. I have ask many authors for comment and all say that genus with subgenus is the valid name. I cant made species who don't assist as valid. PeterR (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Cuora chriskarannarum[edit]

PeterR, Cuora chriskarannarum is a junior synonym of Cuora pani it should not have its own page, it was synonymised by the original author McCord, as an error. This taxon should not have a page I will be deleting it. ok? Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 19:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Faendalimas: Please do not delete, but create a redirect to the valid name. Thanks --Murma174 (talk) 20:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
@Murma174: of course, cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) talk 21:28, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
I have done it. PeterR (talk) 08:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Talk page archival[edit]

Hello Peter, and as always: thank you for your many good edits! Your user talk page is getting very long, with a lot of old discussions. If you like to I can archive the discussions from 2016 and earlier, in the same way OhanaUnited helped you with the archives from 2008 and 2010? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC).

Please Tommy do it PeterR (talk) 06:15, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:50, 2 May 2017 (UTC).
Tommy, thanks PeterR (talk) 17:35, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Please block 94.122.92.179[edit]

Please block Special:Contribs/94.122.92.179 because this IP doing vandalism. Thanks.--Rxy (talk) 11:05, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Atachorutes najtae[edit]

Hello Peter, your reference is about Stachorutes najtae. A mistake? --Succu (talk) 10:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

  • Succu, This was a mistake. It have to be Stachorutes najtae. I have repair it. Thanks for your attention PeterR (talk) 11:10, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Repositories error[edit]

Hi Peter, Why did you make the this change in Repositories? You made a mistake, please revert this edit. Mariusm (talk) 09:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC).

Marius, I don't know what you mean. PeterR (talk) 09:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
You redirected Repositories to Walter Michael Neukirchen which is wrong. Mariusm (talk) 14:09, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Marius, I hope it is good again. PeterR (talk) 14:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Template:Aurivillius, 1909b[edit]

Peter, I thought we agreed to keep the "b" in "1990b" for the Template name, but not to include the "b" after the "1990" in the reference itself. This keeps the citation cleaner and more normal, but enables us to list multiple references for the same author in the same year. Can we agree to keep it that way? Thanks. Alan Accassidy (talk) 21:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC).

    • Alan, I have made the template like the same way as 1909a which made by you. We had an agreement to make the templates on this way. What is the problem now? PeterR (talk) 07:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Jacques Plante[edit]

Hello Peter. May I ask what reference you used when you added the years of birth and death for Swiss entomologist Jacques Plante? He is currently being discussed at Wikidata, here. We would like to be able to verify the information, since there are at least four different people in the database listed as "Jacques Plante". (You are welcome to answer here in your Wikispecies talk page: you do not have to answer at Wikidata if you do not want to.) Thank you in advance, and best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC).

Tommy, So far I know I use the Jacques Plante reference whose collection is deposed in Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Genève, Switzerland. What I could find on informations I have placed by Jacques Plant, PeterR (talk) 08:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. However, I was specifically wondering about this edit when you added the years of Plante's birth and death. From were did you get that information? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC).

Tommy, I found the dates (1920-2003) in Lepidopterae novae 6(1) see: [1]. page: 7

Thank you very much! I will add the reference to Wikidata. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC).
  • If you have more questions, I hear it PeterR (talk) 14:56, 28 November 2017 (UTC)