User talk:PeterR/Archive 2010

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is an archive of closed discussions. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.

Re: Allotinus (Allotinus)[edit]

I don't see the problem anymore. I guess you fixed it? OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Caradrina likiangia -> Caradrina (Caradrina) likiangia[edit]

You can't move one page to another existing page because the software treats it as a "deletion" of an old page followed by an immediate "creation" of a new page. If it was a move to an non-existing page, then the software will allow you because there's no "deletion" required to take place. In short, you need an admin to perform such a move. So do you want me to do it for you? OhanaUnitedTalk page 13:13, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

 Done OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:09, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
So you mean it should be Caradrina (Caradrina) likiangia moving to Caradrina likiangia?
I rarely use the move button so even I wasn't too familiar with this feature, nor the use of subgenus. Is the correct text showing now? Plus, subgenus pages usually have the subgenus name in it. Not sure why the template was set up that way. For me, I will just type it out normally instead of templates to avoid the hassle. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Is the text there prior to deletion? If so, I'll restore the pages so we don't need to tackle another problem. The subgenus template was last changed in December 18, 2009. I'm going to ask User:Rocket000 to help us since he knows more about template than me. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Peter, I think you're afraid about pages like Tethea (Saronaga) albicosta? If so, don't worry, the species pages are not empty. They are still available. The answer is on User talk:Arachn0#Protaetia page. Arachn0 has changed Template:Sgsplast and Template:Sgsp. If I'm right, we can: (1) revert Arachn0's edits or (2) redirect genera/subgenera (with parentheses) names to binominal (without parentheses) species names. We should rule, I think. Ark (talk page) 21:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I think we should revert the change to the template until we move/redirect all the pages that depend on it's old behavior. However, I agree that page name should not include the subgenus (the name section can). I almost created a bunch of duplicate species pages because the names most commonly used were red. Rocket000 01:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I'll help create the redirects but I need to know what naming convention we're using here. Rocket000 01:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Re: Subgenus[edit]

Yes, the subgenus should be included in the name section, however, I think the standard binomial name should be used as the page title. That will be what most people search for. Outside of scientific literature (like Wikipedia), it's rare to see the subgenus be used. Most databases don't use that notation either. Rocket000 14:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

It is for professionals, but even so, binomial names are still standard. Anyway, I'm not going to change them myself. I was just giving my opinion. I'm ok with leaving the names the way the are as long as we create redirects (which can also be done by moving the pages too). Rocket000 14:30, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I would change those templates but I don't want to break anymore links. I'll start creating the redirects instead (like I did for Tethea (Saronaga)). Rocket000 14:40, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm doing all of them. It will take some time. Rocket000 14:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. You too. :) Rocket000 14:57, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
So is the problem solved now? OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Log out[edit]

This is browser setting. Nothing to do with Wikispecies or its servers. In fact, many forums do this if there's a user occupying a spot but no activity, they'll auto log out as a safe security measure in case another user uses the same computer and starts doing stuff without knowledge of previous user. OhanaUnitedTalk page 21:49, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Using templates sbgsp and sgsp[edit]

Hello Peter,

I found you made many errors with the template sgsp!

Please notice: there are 2 templates for subgenera species: sbgsp and sgsp.

  • Use template sbgsp when you have species pages in the format Genus (Subgenus) species.
  • Use template sgsp when you have species in the format Genus species but you want to display them as G. (S.) species.

When you use sgsp on Genus (Subgenus) species the link doesn't work!!

Mariusm 10:49, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

When you have pages with the title Genus (Subgenus) species please use only template sbgsp. Mariusm 12:04, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
You are right: Arachn0 changed the template sgsp at December. This causes many errors now! Arachn0 shouldn't have touched this template!! Mariusm 12:43, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
The template sgsp was restored to its original use. Zygaena (Mesembrynus) araxis seems now OK.
I made 2 new templates: sgsps and sgspslast to be used for pages with names in the format Genus species (See village pump for details) Mariusm 05:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)


Hi, Peter,

Some time ago we discussed it. Higher classification of Nematoda is up to date: Adenophorea and Secernentea are no longer used as the first is paraphyletic in relation to the second. (by the way, Secernentea is equivalent to Rhabditida in its today's sense, but Secernentea is not used) Kuzia 19:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please wait![edit]

Please do it like this: Pholcus babao thanks, Stho002 06:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

No, Chinese names are tricky! If they are given as one name in the publication, then use 1 initial, if they are given as hyphenated, then use hyphen. I don't think it is correct to use two initials like you are doing??? Stho002 07:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
reply: I dont think Y.F. Tong is correct, it is either Y.-F. Tong, or Y. Tong. It is given as Y. Tong in the publication (no hyphen), so use Y. Tong. You can always redirect it to Y.-F. Tong, if that form of the name is used in other publications by same author Stho002 07:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
yes, just one quick and simple redirect for each name - won't take a minute ... Stho002 07:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Like this Pholcus babao please! I have done the redirect. Stho002 07:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Something about Chinese name? I am Chinese and I can definitely help. OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Check my talk page. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Check it again! Stho002 20:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
And check it yet again! Stho002 20:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Hello Peter, Thanks. I had a very busy time in the latter half of 2009, but it is now winter season and I am able to do a little work here. Its good to be back. Alan Accassidy 16:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


Peter, would you please look at Talk:Hypolycaenini where I have suggested an alternative way forward. I would value your comments. Alan. Accassidy 18:15, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

He keeps getting blocked, then gets back in again. Nothing we can do except keep reverting him. Maybe he'll decide life is more productive elsewhere. Accassidy 18:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)


Yes, please feel free to add them Stho002 20:00, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


Peter, I have been making Templates where a Species has a number of sub-species to be listed. This saves time. If the Species has no named sub-species, then I do not bother. I cannot see why we would not make a Template for a species that has many races described. Why would we just stop at the Genus level? Alan Accassidy 19:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Alan is correct Stho002 20:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Re:Template species[edit]

To make species-templates isn't a WS philosophy, but it isn't forbidden either. It depends on the user, and on the subspecies' number. I, for myself don't create templates beyond Genus, because it feels like an over-kill, and I don't bother making an additional line. So if it makes work easier for you, go ahead and make species templates. Mariusm 17:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)


Dag Peter,

Kan jij (of ken jij iemand die dat kan) een naam kleven op deze vlinder uit de groep Geometrinae? Ze werd genomen in Costa Rica in de buurt van de Arenal vulkaan. Groet. lycaon 12:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Heb je dit gelezen?


Peter, do whatever you think is best, provided you can cite references. Stho002 23:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


Peter, I think that the options would be that the 1997 name was either Chitoria tong or Chitoria ulupi tong, depending on whether Yoshino considered tong to be specific or sub-specific status. However, I can see no way of confirming which without sight of the 1997 paper. I suggest making a redirect from Chitoria tong to Chitoria ulupi to keep the reference at the higher accessible level. Alan. Accassidy 21:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Argyreus hyperbius and Cowania achaja[edit]

Peter, can you tell me why you blanked these pages? Argyreus hyperbius looks perfectly fine to me. OhanaUnitedTalk page 07:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


Hello Peter, I'm not an expert of these myself, but would be happy to refer it to a friend who might know what it is. However, before I do that, do you have any idea where the picture was taken; which country or geographical region even? Alan. Accassidy 16:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


Beste PeterR,

ik heb een vraag. Ik heb de pagina Mesoclemmys dahli aangemaakt maar kwam er net achter dat er al een pagina genaamd Phrynops dahli bestond, wat een synoniem is van Mesoclemmys dahli. Dus nu bestaan er twee pagina's voor hetzelfde dier. Ik weet dat ik beter Phrynops dahli had kunnen hernoemen, maar ik toen wist nog niet dat die pagina bestond.

Ik snap dat één van de twee pagina's verwijderd moet worden, maar welke? De pagina die het eerst bestond of de pagina die de correcte naam heeft? En hoe kan ik zo'n pagina nomineren voor verwijdering?

Bij voorbaat dank, --Kennyannydenny 19:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


show me an example, please ... Stho002 (talk) 20:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:Village pump[edit]

  1. What we vote for at the village pump is to make the taxonavigation list smaller, so it won't occupy so much vertical space on the screen, and the more important information such as synonyms, references etc, will be closer to the screen's top.
  2. You are right about the subgenera, but someone searching for a species, usually types only Genus species, so it is more convenient to make the species name in the simpler format. The problem is WS hasn't a strict preferance of either format, and everyone enters the format of his choise. The best way would be to make a redirect from Genus species to Genus (Subgenus) species. Mariusm (talk) 17:42, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


You have new messages
Hello, PeterR. You have new messages at Sevenseas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
 Sevenseas Talk Contribs  14:34, 30 March 2010 (UTC)


Peter, this is a wiki, and you really need to solve any problems like this yourself. I haven't got time to sort it all out for you. Someone else has just fixed Cerambyx (Cerambyx), to some extent, so it may now be better ... Stho002 (talk) 05:25, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Lists of Genera[edit]

Hello Peter. Could you explain why you have modified the list of genera under Polyommatini to have each genus on a different line when on the Liptenina page you created you have the genera listed continuously with soft returns? As the two option look the same on the public page, I don't understand the reason for spending time changing it. Best Wishes, Alan. Accassidy (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

OK. Just interested, that's all. Accassidy (talk) 16:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


Peter, Thanks for finding the paper on Jameela. I have downloaded a copy and have revised all the pages the two Genera concerned: Erysichton and Jameela. Accassidy (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Atalanta, 2002, 33 (3-4): 339-360[edit]

Peter, I am not familiar with this periodical or this author, so I am not sure how robust the taxa might be. However, as they are published names, they should be included. For now you might treat these as valid and leave it to other editors, if they know more, to make amendments in these genera. I think it better to include than to ignore. Alan. Accassidy (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Entomologische Zeitschrift 2010[edit]

Are there any Coleoptera articles? I can't seem to find a contents page online ... Stho002 (talk) 07:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


Peter, There is now a conflict concerning Agrodiaetus and Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus). There is disagreement about included species and also, now, species groups. I do not have access to the references quoted, so I do not know which, if any, is authoritative. What is your opinion on this? Alan. Accassidy (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Peter, My preference is to use Agrodiaetus as a good genus within Polyommatini, following the paper by Kandul et al, 2004, which considers Agriodaetus to be monophyletic. I have read that paper just recently. Hence I have started to expand the Agrodiaetus page. If you agree with me, then I would be minded to redirect Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus) to Agrodiaetus rather than the other way around. My alphabetic list of species on Agrodiaetus is not yet complete, but includes all species level taxa listed by Kandul. I will transfer other good species from the Polyommatus (Agrodiaetus) page before I redirect it. Regards. Alan Accassidy (talk) 22:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


Peter, It would appear that someone, I think Stho002, has already set up a redirect from Maculinea to Phengaris, but the Phengaris page is very much devoid of species links or any mention of Sub-Genera. The Wang & Settele paper is a bit ambiguous, as it mentions Phengaris (Maculinea) but also refers simply to Phengaris for its new species. Do you know how Zhdanko, 2003 treated this subject? I have only a short abstract of that paper. Alan Accassidy (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

I've now seen the Wang etc paper and it rfers to: Fric ZK, Wahlberg N, Pech P, Zrzavy J (2007) Phylogeny and classification of the Phengaris–Maculinea clade (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae): total evidence and phylogenetic species concepts. Systematic Entomology 32: 558–567. This is the more definitive work, so I'll try to get a copy of that. Accassidy (talk) 22:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)


I have unblocked it. By the way, please don't put family/subfamily/tribe names in italics - NEVER! Stho002 (talk) 21:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Assistance required[edit]

Peter, can you please do me a favour and create species pages for all the species I have listed in Dieuches? They all have the same author/date, so all you need to do is copy and paste the page for Dieuches abundans and change the species name (two times per page)... Stho002 (talk) 21:46, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks Stho002 (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
I have made one minor change, please copy and paste from the Dieuches abundans page Stho002 (talk) 05:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Excellent! Thank you ... Stho002 (talk) 06:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
I have added more species. Can you please copy and paste Dieuches africanus to all the names without pages (i.e. red names)? They all have different authors/dates, but I can put these in later. They are all mentioned in Eyle's book. Stho002 (talk) 22:40, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Something else I would appreciate help with: can you please go through, adding {{Taxonav|FAMILY}} to each FAMILY template? Stho002 (talk) 08:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC) I have just done it for Template:Agelenidae. A few others may be done already...
The list is only for N.Z., but the templates are global. All the world spider family templates need fixing, but this is a start... Stho002 (talk) 09:16, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Chamaeleo[edit]

Hello Peter, I'm glad to see you're still hard at work at WS. As to Chamaeleo, Trioceros was a subgenus of Chamaeleo, but in 2009 it was elevated to genus status, so Chamaeleo and Trioceros are considered now separate genera.

One point about author pages: I saw you put the author's publications in the talk page. Why you do this? Why not put the publications in the main author page? Mariusm (talk) 04:12, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


Well, I just finished archiving Steven's talk page. Would you like me to archive your talk page? OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:New Combination[edit]

yes, they do count, but it can be complicated, ... Stho002 (talk) 07:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Chasminodes nigrifascia[edit]

Are you sure you provided the right link? It is showing a blog when I visited it. OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Give me the full link. My google doesn't show what appears on yours. OhanaUnitedTalk page 05:05, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

doi template[edit]

Peter, PLEASE, PLEASE use the doi template {{doi|}}
you then just have to click on the doi number and you get the abstract page (no need to add another URL to the abstract)
thanks, --Stho002 (talk) 08:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


Peter, I have now obtained a copy of the paper by Fric et al, 2007, and have set out Phengaris accordingly. I have used their species groupings, but not Sub-Genera, as they do not use that term explicitly. Best Wishes, Accassidy (talk) 11:12, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there is an Item 3508 on the ICZN website concerning a proposal to give Maculinea precedence, though no argument is given. I won't plan to make any changes here until I see a full report from ICZN, I have other stuff I want to spend my time on, but we may revert later if necessary. Alan. Accassidy (talk) 14:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


Do you think MZB ("Museum Zoologicum Bogoriense") is the same as your newly added ZMBJ in the institutions list? If it were, I'll "redirect" the former to the latter in the list. Circeus (talk) 18:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: +iw[edit]

I use iw as an abbreviation for interwiki, adding links to the other wikipedias. I know that there are bots that can do some of it, but they haven't run here in a while. I am going by the articles at Special:WithoutInterwiki. Open2universe | Talk 14:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this archive.