User talk:Tommy Kronkvist/Archive 2012–2014

From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 9 years ago by Andyboorman in topic Removing legitimate content
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.


Hi there, if you use defaultsort on a page then you should not specify the sort in the category. I have fixed one. See [1] Open2universe | Talk 13:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Oh, okay. Thanks for the heads up, I didn't know that. It will not happen again! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC).Reply
No problem. and again welcome Open2universe | Talk 23:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)Reply


I have nominated you to become one of Wikispecies:Administrators.

Out of present 25 admins, 6 admins has not been active during the last 5 years. As Wikispecies develops there is a need of more sysops (active users).

If you accept, please confirm at nomination page below the nomination, and above the line support.

Dan Koehl (talk) 04:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I accepted the nomination earlier today. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 23:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC).Reply
You are now an Admin. Congratulations. Dan Koehl (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2014 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:46, 16 April 2014 (UTC).Reply

Reference templates – a handy hint

  • Use {{subst:reftemp}} immediately after the reference citation on a new template page, and it will automatically add the "find all Wikispecies pages which cite this reference" link Stho002 (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! –Tommy Kronkvist, 02:36, 9 May 2014 (UTC).Reply

Vote request

Hello, I’m Marius, an admin here at WS. I would like to ask you to contribute to an important ongoing vote which will practically decide the future of WS. As you probably know, the user Stho002, an admin, is forcefully endorsing his concept of the content and format of WS. His “system” includes a complex mesh of templates and links which is nowhere specified or written down, is not considered as a consensus, and is not easy or trivial to use, especially by newcomers. As my experience goes, when I save an edited page, Stho002 will delete or change it sooner or later, sometimes in a matter of seconds. This is no way of maintaining a healthy community. It is a lamentable fact that the aggressiveness by which Stho enforces his way deters many users and causes many newcomers leave this site.

The original WS help pages ([2], [3], [4]) contain a much simpler system, where the resulting taxa information is no less clear nor less detailed then Stho’s format, and which is being used successfully for years by experienced users as well as by novices.

If we decide that our current page format is outdated in need of improvement, we surely must make the change through collaboration and discussion. It is unacceptable that a single user will dictate his concept, however better-suited for our purposes he thinks it is.

We therefore have three options: (a) to make Stho002 system the official WS format; (b) to endorse the system specified in the help pages; (c) to devise a new system by mutual cooperation. After we reach an agreement, we’ll modify the help pages accordingly, resulting in a consistent way of doing things, without having to fight among ourselves, without having to resort to deleting and modifying each other’s work.

Therefore please read the discussion here and take a moment of your time and make your choice here. I think it is your obligation as an admin to participate in the vote. Thanks, Mariusm (talk) 08:58, 13 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

 Done. I voted at 20:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC). Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC).Reply

Admin request

Thank for your comment with my requete to become administrator, I will take note of your remarks Cordialement Startupevo1 (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

You're most welcome. Please continue to add valuable material to Wikispecies, and bear in mind that the opportunity to gain adminship might of course be open in the future. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC).Reply

Ready for translation: VisualEditor News #8 (2014)

Hi, I'd like to inform you that the upcoming VisualEditor newsletter for September and October will be fully translatable for the first time. Here's the direct link for your convenience, if you can help with this task. Please find other details in this message at the Translators list. Thanks for your attention, Elitre (WMF) 22:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Translation in Hindi language

(Moved to the Village Pump. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:58, 17 October 2014 (UTC).Reply


For various good reasons, it is best to treat combinations differently to real synonyms, at least in zoology, if not botany. It makes sense to give real synonyms a page of their own, as there will be information and references associated with the synonym. For example, ideally we would want an image of the type. Since one species may have several synonyms, there will be several types, so they should go on the appropriate page with the name. For combinations, do the redirects as you have been doing, but don't bother listing the combinations as synonyms. It is a good idea to cite the original genus, if the combination has changed. These suggestions will improve WS for most users. Thanks, Stho002 (talk) 23:54, 19 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I can see that. Perhaps even more so for Cyprinodontiformes where I focus most of my edits, since quite a few combinations there are used as synonyms for several species. (For instance, Aphyosemion bivittatum is not only a valid species in its own right, but also a synonym (or misapplied designation) of the valid species Aphyosemion koungueense, Aphyosemion volcanum, and several others. Thanks for the heads-up, and for the nice work on the Girardinichthys limnurgus example. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:17, 20 October 2014 (UTC).Reply
Yes indeed, one of the biggest dangers here at WS is that complexity will spiral out of control. Believe it or not, I am trying hard to keep things simple, but at the same time accurate and useful. Combinations and misidentifications can be noted in [] after the relevant reference, on the taxon page. Stho002 (talk) 00:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Reply


This is why we should always use reference templates! Then you can change an author link just once, not on every page! In this case Mariusm, as per usual, put more information on the page than we need (and less in that the references were not cited in useful form!), so I have edited the problem out of the page. Stho002 (talk) 01:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Swedish Topics

Thanks for upgrading my ISSN 0368-8151 publication page. For some reason, it was very difficult for me to find the ISSN for it. Do you know if there is Webpage? I could not find one. Also, please look over my SMNH page, and see if I got it right. Thanks, Neferkheperre (talk) 13:32, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

You're most welcome. I don't think there is a web page for Lunds Universitets Årsskrift, but I'll look in to it, as well as the SMNH page. I know a couple of curators working at SMNH, and they might be helpful. For instance, I know that the SMNH publish a whole bunch of different scientific journals (depending on department), and I'll try to find out ISSN's etc for them. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:46, 22 October 2014 (UTC).Reply


...please have a look here: Pege‎. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 18:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello Orchi. That page was deleted by User:Stho002 at 8:06 p.m. (UTC), 20 October 2014. Prior to the deletion the page was incorrectly named, and did not use standard taxon formatting. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:10, 22 October 2014 (UTC).Reply


Går det att få privat kontakt. Jag behöver fråga saker på svenska Uleli (talk) 19:44, 21 October 2014 (UTC).Reply

Det går utmärkt. Navigera till min användar- eller diskussionssida (där du ju är nu) och klicka på "Email this user" (alternativt "Skicka e-post till den här användaren" om du valt det svenskspråkiga användargränssnittet) under menyn "Tools" ("Verktyg") i menyfältet till vänster. Då har du möjlighet att sända "vanlig" e-post till mig, snarare än kommunicera här på diskussionssidan. Med vänlig hälsning, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:51, 22 October 2014 (UTC).Reply

Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London

I'm not sure that creating this page was a good idea? What is your rationale? Are you going to do it consistently for all the other thousands of journals?? Stho002 (talk) 23:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

You're right. It's now deleted. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 23:32, 6 November 2014 (UTC).Reply
Thanks. By the way, all you need to do when creating refs. is to have this page Category:ISSN bookmarked. Go down the list to the title you want, click on it, then click edit on the journal page, and you can usually copy and paste the journal link to your reference Stho002 (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Great tip – thanks for the advice! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:49, 6 November 2014 (UTC).Reply


I have just written some advice on the User Page of Stho002. I ask also that you contribute to a period of quiet reflection, while everyone calms down a bit. Thanks. Accassidy (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Good initiative. Also, I'm calm as ever. :-) Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:56, 9 November 2014 (UTC).Reply

Template advice

Hi Tommy also @Dan Koehl:. Could you please look at the two templates I have created.

I am fairly new to templates and would appreciate your views. They are laid out using my preferred formats etc and if used will appear on a number of pages. I am sure that Stho002 will apply his edits when he sees that I have created them, probably by changing the dates to Year:, altering the the journal name to something like Botanical journal of the Linnean Society and also getting rid of the direct PDF link. However, I would appreciate your considered views on my original versions. Thanks Andyboorman (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

@Dan Koehl:@Andyboorman: I got a ping about this (since Andyboorman included [[User:Stho002|Stho002]]), so I will comment: My main problem with what he has done is that, surely, he must know that when you click on the doi, it directs you to the same page he has then redundantly linked to with the overly verbose statement that the PDF is available online (available, BTW, only by subscription)??? Stho002 (talk) 21:44, 25 November 2014 (UTC)Reply
Got a heads up re Stephen's {{subst:reftemp}}, which I edited into the above and its use saves copy/paste angst! The guy has some great ideas can you encourage him to share them via the Pump! Andyboorman (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Removing legitimate content

Hi Tommy sorry to say that User:Stho002 is, in my opinion, removing legitimate content, which is ironically backed up by a quote from a journal reference he templated (Swenson et al., 2013). See recent edits on Leptostylis, Pycnandra subg. Leptostylis, Chrysophylloideae and Sapotaceae. What to do? Andyboorman (talk) 20:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

It is more complicated, and Andyboorman was making an inconsistent mess of something which needs to be kept as simple as possible ... Stho002 (talk) 20:28, 16 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
Of course it is complicated and a mess, primarily as Stho002 created Pycnandra subg. Leptostylis a taxon that was proposed by Swenson et al. in an earlier paper but in 2013 they expressed doubts about the arguments they put forward in 2010. In 2013 they state that Leptostylis may not be subsumed into Pycnandra after all. However, later in the 2013 paper they state that they are preparing a paper submitting the changes involving Leptostylis and Pycnandra subg. Leptostylis, but this has not yet been published and therefore the changes surely are not yet valid? Therefore, both Leptostylis and Pycnandra subg. Leptostylis are disputed taxa if the later is to remain on WS - my attempt to resolve the situation, which I got part way through before intervention. As it stands, the circumscription of Pycnandra subg. Leptostylis is a taxonomic mess and needs comment, but that is not my problem. Also IMO it is too earlier to delete Leptostylis from Chrysophylloideae and Sapotaceae, as the genus appears on IPNI and Tropicos, but the unresolved subgenus does not. Andyboorman (talk) 11:09, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
Boorman fails to understand that that the 2013 paper fails to cite the highly relevant 2010 paper. This suggests publication delays such that the 2013 paper was actually written first. Stho002 (talk) 19:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
Stephen is assuming something that may or may not have occurred ie 2013 was written before 2010. - I prefer to go with facts one of which is all the Ulf Swenson 2009, 2010 and 2012 papers on WS are in the 2013 paper reference list and are cited in the text, eg p 752 and 766 of the 2013 paper. So is there another highly relevant 2010 paper not on Stephen's WS reference lists or that I am unable to locate? OK it is a mess that is for sure! Andyboorman (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply
Moving house so will leave this up to somebody else. Stephen will have to find somebody else to follow around Plantae for the immediate future! By the way he is also changing disambig from family to ICBN - good idea or not needed? Seasons greetings! Andyboorman (talk) 15:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello Andy and Stephen. I currently suffer from the flu (most likely Influenza B virus) and therefore don't really feel up to participating in this discussion – yet. I'll get back to you both when the fever becomes a bit less persistent. Also, I'll try to read up on the taxonomy regarding Leptostylis etc. before that. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC).Reply

Trust you are better and have had a Happy New Year. I will try this approach Chrysophylloideae along with Leptostylis. However, not fully participating in WS yet and when I do I will not contribute originally for this family until this has been sorted - after all there are many red links and I do not need micromanagement!. Good luck Andyboorman (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

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.