User talk:Tommy Kronkvist/Archive 2017–2018

From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Tommy Kronkvist in topic Greetings
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.

Author formatting in Synonymy section

Tommy, I have a policy of refraining from formatting author names in the Synonymy section with Small Caps, because of the un-necessary complexity. Capitalisation is present in the Name section and in all the References, which I think is enough. Also, the use of BASEPAGENAME format saves a lot of time when creating new pages. There seems little point in removing the shortcut and typing in the full taxon nama again and again. Accassidy (talk) 22:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Accassidy: Hi Alan. In my opinion not formatting author names in the Synonyms/Synonymy sections with small caps actually adds to the complexity, since it may confuse (particularly new) users regarding when to use small caps, and when not to. In my opinion it's better to always use small caps for taxon authorities – of course taking care to omit names unrelated to the actual taxonomy, such as captain (later vice admiral) Kellett in "The botany of the voyage of H.M.S. Herald, under the command of Captain Henry Kellett […]" and other similar citations. Sadly and as often before our Help pages fail to give any clear guidance on the "proper" way of handling this matter.
Whether to use {{BASEPAGENAME}} or not is an ever ongoing discussion, I guess... Indeed it is a timesaver when creating new pages, however I see no harm in swapping the magic word for the actual page name later on, especially if other edits are made at the same time. That being said, I will have no problems with leaving your basepagenames intact in the future...  There are important exceptions though. While magic words are very safe to use in most taxon pages, they do not always handle diacritics or apostrophes very well. Hence author pages such as João R. Alves-Oliveira, Charles Oberthür or indeed even O'Connor should never use BASEPAGENAME. (As I guess you know the same goes for DEFAULTSORT were apostrophes, diacritics and graphemes should never be used either.)
Lastly I would like to take the opportunity to thank you for the huge efforts and good work you put into Wikispecies! As always I'm open to any suggestions or ideas you have in regards to the above issues, and others. –Tommy Kronkvist, 00:34, 4 January 2017 (UTC).Reply
Tommy, I have an open mind on the capitalisation thing, so will not take it further. There are all sorts of different standards among journal editors today, so there is no need to be pedantic here. My aim here is to keep increasing the knowledge base, not to spend much time on formatting issues. Happy New Year. Alan. Accassidy (talk) 10:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Accassidy: Alan, you're right about the current citation styles: there's so many of them neither one can really be considered being "a standard" anymore. Capitalisation of author names is a minor issue and personally I find the author links themselves more important, since the information given on author pages can be of help when verifying a citation. There I'm less flexible. I see a lot of users who only link the first occurrence of an author name (often in the "Name" section) and then leaves the name unlinked. Personally I find it important to always link the author name in the references since, well, it is the reference section, after all... Other author links in the name- and synonymy sections etc are fine, although not as important. However as long as the actual information is at least presented in an apprehensible format, increasing the knowledge base should of course be our major goal. I wish you a very Happy New Year as well. –Tommy Kronkvist, 16:00, 6 January 2017 (UTC).Reply


That should be all the templates, apart from the ZT prefixed ones, and some that looked like they were a systemic import. being the remainder.

Perhaps you can resolve what the concerns about the updating were, and get these updated? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply


I will give a fuller explanation...

My suggestion was to have a sub-namespace prefix for certain templates.

References would be for example, the current template. {{Forman, 1991}} would be {{R:Forman, 1991}} or {{Forman, 1991}})

Templates that are obviously Taxo-Navigation ones would be (T: or N:) (example{{Abalistes}} would become {{T:Abalistes}} or alternatively {{Abalistes}} )

This would over time allow a more discrete identification of what a template is for by name. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:18, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Your idea sure is worth taking into consideration, but first a few words on the preconditions. First of all, it is important to remember the MediaWiki namespaces. By definition, all of our templates must reside in the "Template namespace". In order for them to do so their names must start with "Template:" (including the colon). Otherwise they will not be treated as templates by the Wiki server software, regardless of their content. Consequently all of our pages that are not templates must not reside in that namespace, lest they erroneously be treated as templates by mistake. This is the reality of how the wiki software runs, and nothing we can do much about.
Secondly, using the present Wikispecies praxis all templates with a file name including a date or year e.g. {{Forman, 1991}} are references. Consequently, templates without a timestamp in their file name are not refences, e.g. {{Abalistes}}. There are a few exceptions, for instance the reference template {{Crit. Rev. Eucalyptus}}, however they are few and far between and will nonetheless always show a year of publication when rendered on a taxon page.
There is a third type of template aside from the reference and Taxonavigation ones, namely "community related" templates for welcoming users, templates regarding our Wikimedia sister projects, anti-vandalism templates, and such. However they are almost exclusively used by experienced users, and on top of that they are easily distinguishable, and well sorted using subcategories in the Category:Templates main category. –Tommy Kronkvist, 19:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC).Reply
Yes obviously Template: namespace is non-negotiable, otherwise you couldn't use them as intended. :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)Reply


Template:Nelson;2006 needs fixing. Not sure how. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

@ShakespeareFan00: Apart from the non-standard naming scheme of the template file itself, what do you find wrong with it? Are there any errors within the template's actual code? (Also, I moved the above template link from the heading to the body text, since many users consider wiki linked headings less legible and therefore malformed.) Tommy Kronkvist, 16:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC).Reply
Typo. Removed to Template:Nelson, 2006. Ark (talk) 20:14, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Italicising publication abbreviations in name section

Hi! I have reverted some of your formatting, e.g. in Anomospermum solimoesanum In my opinion, italicising publication abbreviations within the name section is not correct. Italics should be restricted to taxon names there. In my understanding, using italics for names of journals within the references can be justified by the objective to make them easily distinguishable from the titles of the publications. Anyway, that's a WS house rule and not a generally accepted custom. However, in the name section this need to distinguish publication titles from journal names does not exist. (In fact the publication abbreviation may stand both for a journal name or a book title.) In the contrary, italicising publication abbreviations within the name section counteracts the reason, why the convention to italicise taxon names has been established, i.e. highlighting these taxon names. Actually, neither IPNI, which is the most important standard reference for these abbreviations, nor Tropicos, nor WCSP do italicise these abbreviations.
Moreover, in the above example of Anomospermum solimoesanum I had checked with the original publication, that the name Abuta Froesii there had not been italicised. This "error" actually was intentional. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 13:38, 7 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Franz Xaver: Hi! Thinking it over I realise that you are of course correct, and I thank you for reverting my edits. Since your reverts I've changed the manually wiki linked and nested {{Aut}} templates into automatically linked {{A}} templates (per Wikispecies praxis), but I've made sure not to touch your italicisation. Thank you for the good work! –Tommy Kronkvist, 23:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC).Reply
Yes, OK about the formatting of authorities. This does not make any difference in the appearance of the page. Anyway, for me editing is easier, if I have to use only one kind of template for small caps and don't need to think about using the one or the other. Morover, in the source text the square brackets show a better visibility of the linked author names. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
As for square brackets and visibility of links I don't think so, but most likely that's very different from user to user. It probably boils down to users' habits and what we're accustomed to. Since the wiki code is presented slightly different on different computer/mobile platforms, browsers and operating systems that may also be taken into account. Using {{a|Author}} instead of {{aut|[[Author]]}} might save a few kilobytes of code here and there, but other than that I don't think its a big deal, and guess all users are free to chose whichever method they please. However, when I see several author names (linked or not) nested within a single {{aut}} template I will always split them into several separate, unnested templates. The reason is that nested author names within a single template, for example {{aut|(Moldenke) Krukoff & Barneby}} may inadvertently also format non-author names with small caps, including words such as "ex", "and", etc. –Tommy Kronkvist, 00:32, 9 January 2017 (UTC).Reply
I have to accept, that you are right concerning this point. Regards --Franz Xaver (talk) 06:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)Reply


Have u ever sign on phabricator tell what u do to sign I try sign but I am not getting through Scott mcCold (talk) 16:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

For information about Phabricator, please see Phabricator at MediaWiki. –Tommy Kronkvist, 19:17, 12 January 2017 (UTC).Reply


Tommy, Why give you no asnwer on my question? PeterR (talk) 11:03, 21 January 2017‎ (UTC)Reply

Thread moved to PeterR's talk page, where the discussion started.


Tommy, some time ago you mentioned actions where a bot was required, Now, with more time, Im trying to find the location for that discussion, but I cant, what was the issue? Dan Koehl (talk) 02:18, 26 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Application for Checkuser

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)Reply

Another application for Check User

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)Reply

Third application for checkuser

Further to recent messages, I am also offering to serve, so that we have three checkuser operators, to ensure adequate coverage in case one of the others is unavailable. Please comment at Wikispecies:Checkusers/Requests/Pigsonthewing. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:47, 28 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Additional Checkuser Application

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)Reply

Standing for role of checkUser

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)Reply

RFC on Checkusers

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)Reply

Request for vote reg use of BASEPAGENAME

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)Reply

Template:Mueller, 1876

Hello Tommy Kronkvist, can you please emend this template (that you created) for the whole Volume 10 of Fragmenta Phytographiae Australiae? Now it is just for one single page of it. I think it is needed several times. Thank you, --Thiotrix (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello Thiotrix. Sure thing! Unfortunately I don't have time to do it tonight, but I will fix it tomorrow and send you a note when an updated version of the template is available. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:44, 1 March 2017 (UTC).Reply
@Thiotrix: The template is now updated in several ways, see {{Mueller, 1876–1877}}. For an example of how it is used, please see Melaleuca leiocarpa. The old template {{Mueller, 1876}} has been deleted. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:38, 2 March 2017 (UTC).Reply
It works fine, especially setting a link to BHL is a nice extra! By the way, where do I find those issue numbers at BHL? Thanks. --Thiotrix (talk) 15:07, 2 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

───────────────────────── Hello again Gabriele/@Thiotrix: and please excuse my very late reply. As far as I know there is no shortcut to finding the issue numbers other than simply reading through the documents. For example {{Mueller, 1876–1877|83|55}} (used on Melaleuca leiocarpa) will render this link to BHL. There the page number 55 is shown on the top of the document, in the main window. It is also listed in the left "Pages" menu, but please note that the numbers given there are not always the actual page numbers of the issue – that can differ depending on BHL document layout etc. Hence be sure to always use the page number shown in the in the main window instead, i.e. in the actual document. Anyway, using the mouse or arrow keys to step back through the document in the left "Pages" menu one will soon end up on the issue's first page. In this case page 49 of the BHL document. Listed in the main window you will see "LXXXIII", i.e. issue 83. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:27, 19 March 2017 (UTC).Reply

Autopatrol template

Hi, do you use a template for edits like talk:如果我不在&oldid=2651631 this? If so, which, please? If not, I'm minded to make one. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:56, 2 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Andy. The {{Autopatrolled}} template can be used for this. In my opinion the template is in need of a brush-up, but I haven't got around to it yet. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:11, 2 March 2017 (UTC).Reply
That's handy. Thanks. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:46, 2 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Date fix

Thanks for this. I did, in fact make an ISO date with "month 17". —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:39, 9 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. Failing to spot an occasional typo is only human. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:19, 9 March 2017 (UTC).Reply


Can you add individual species of Grotea like G. anguina – and G. californica –? 2601:5CB:C101:CBF0:2043:B94F:6031:B5A3 04:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Certainly. I've added all 19 species. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:38, 19 April 2017 (UTC).Reply

RE: Hippasella arapensis

Hi, Tommy, it's a mistake. I correct. Best regards, --Eumolpo (talk) 03:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Tommy Kronkvist, 05:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC).Reply

And what policy would that be?

(This discussion started here.)

Varlaam (talk) 18:29, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

A policy that says that dictatorial actions by sysops may never be discussed?
Varlaam (talk) 18:31, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Well. What a big surprise.
I have 2 x as many edits as you.
Varlaam (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Why don't you ask Justin about editors being blocked for inadequate reasons.`
You wouldn't know about that because you only have 60K edits.
Varlaam (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

───────────────────────── @Varlaam: That would be this policy: Wikispecies:Policy. Among other things the policy states that all users should "try to discourage others from being uncivil, and be careful to avoid offending people unintentionally" and "not make personal attacks anywhere in Wikispecies. Comment on content, not on the contributor". Calling fellow users for "assholes" (as you did here) or "little Mussolinis" (as you did here) is without a doubt a breach of said Wikispecies policy, and further such attacks will most likely get you blocked, in the same way as you are already blocked on the English Wikipedia (indefinitely, for edit warring, personal attacks, false claims of vandalism, and refusal to discuss), the Swedish Wikipedia (until June 5, for insults) and the Danish Wikipedia (until June 6, for unacceptable behavior). If you refrain from such behavior you are of course very welcome to continue editing. –Tommy Kronkvist 10:20, 8 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

Varlaam is now blocked, indefinitely. Please see their talk page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:11, 10 May 2017 (UTC)Reply
Noted. –Tommy Kronkvist, 18:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC).Reply

Aaron Bauer

Thank you. I have combined both pages into Aaron M. Bauer, as most complete name, and caught up taxon category. Neferkheperre (talk) 21:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Neferkheperre: Yes, I saw that. The reason I chose to make Aaron M. Bauer a redirect page and Aaron Bauer the main page, is that way more pages are linked to "Aaron Bauer" than to "Aaron M. Bauer". Only a handful of pages had links to the latter: three templates plus Burmeister's talk page and the A.M. Bauer redirect page. After making "Aaron Bauer" the main page I corrected the links in the templates, so only the "A.M. Bauer" page and @Burmeister:'s talk page contained redirects – and two redirects isn't that much.
As a result of your decision to switch this and make "Aaron M. Bauer" the main page, instead of having those two pages linking to the main using redirects, we now have 90 pages linking via a redirect page. That aside, as you say "Aaron M. Bauer" is the most complete name and because of that I do agree that it should take precedence over "Aaron Bauer" – but preferably without the many redirects. I guess the best solution would be to dub Aaron Matthew Bauer the main page (since it is the "completest" name) and then change all links to go there, but I for one is not up to changing some +100 author links simply because it looks better... :-) Then again maybe that part can be easily done with AWB, which I hear is popular these days... In any event, thanks for your great work around here. –Tommy Kronkvist, 22:47, 18 May 2017 (UTC).Reply

Template translation

I finally found a way to find user language for translating templates but I need you to import all these pages from Commons to Species. Thank you CreativeC38 (talk) 06:11, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello @CreativeC38: So, a total of 444 pages with the "Lang" prefix. Unfortunately the "import" function is not currently available at Wikispecies. The sites' transwiki server code is not configured for interwikisource import, and because of that we do not have any members in the "importers" user group. First the code for interwikisource import must be reconfigured, which can not be done locally at Wikispecies but instead should be run through the Bugzilla service. After that we can request a Wikimedia steward to assign one or more users as importers. (Note that we don't have any "local" stewards either, so the request must be done through Wikimedia rather than Wikispecies.)
In order for any of this to work we must first seek local Wikispecies' community consensus upon the matter, otherwise both the code change request and the request for importer assignment will be disregarded by Wikimedia coders and stewards. I will discuss the matter with the other admins, but as you understand it may take some time to get all the above matters in order. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC).Reply
You do not have permission to import pages from another wiki, for the following reason:
The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Administrators, Importers, Transwiki importer
Are you sure you can't use Special:Import ? I exported the pages from meta here. CreativeC38 (talk) 10:50, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
@CreativeC38: If I click Special:Import I'm presented with the text "No wikis from which to import have been defined and direct history uploads are disabled" which according to the Transwiki import help file on Meta is the result of the fact that "on many Wikimedia wikis transwiki import is disabled". According to Import: Implementation on the same page this can be checked using the MediaWiki API, like so: MediaWiki API result – Wikispecies. As you can see there is no value for type in the interwikisource parameter, which indicates that the import function is not configured for Wikispecies. That's the code configuration change I was referring to in my first reply to you, above. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk)‚ 11:11, 4 June 2017 (UTC).Reply

───────────────────────── Hi, I see the discussion on the noticeboard has 0 replies. Maybe we should open an RfC about that ? CreativeC38 (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

And in addition I opened an RfC on Meta-wiki about global translation admins. I hope it will speed up translation on Species . CreativeC38 (talk) 09:34, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
@CreativeC38: Thanks. I'll open up an RfC here at Wikispecies later today, after first looking up some more detailed information about the matter. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
@CreativeC38: Local RfC is now in place. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 11:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
Transwiki import configured. CreativeC38 (talk) 18:36, 10 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
@CreativeC38: I'm about halfway through the list of files you wanted me to import. Out of the 444 files there are now just over 200 additional ones left to import, and then the entire set will be accessible locally here at Wikispecies. I estimate to be done well within the next 24 hours. I'll send you a final ping when we harbour them all. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC).Reply

───────────────────────── @CreativeC38: and also pinging the other translation administrators @AlvaroMolina, Chrumps, Koavf, Samuele2002, and יונה בנדלאק: All of the requested files have now been imported to Wikispecies (including LanguageHandler.js) and the local copies are all listed here. Using the Administrators' Noticeboard as an example I have created a separate Translation Administrators' Noticeboard which I suggest we use for future discussions of this type. Also, I made some changes to the layout of the Translation administrators page, but didn't check up on the related translation tags involved. Please have a look and make sure everything works as intended. Thanks beforehand! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC).Reply

Great work ! CreativeC38 (talk) 15:26, 13 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Like Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:31, 14 July 2017 (UTC).Reply

d'Éterville or Deterville?

Dear Tommy, you may have your reasons to change but I don't understand why, since in the tittle page of the book is clearly spelled Deterville see here and here, and here, and all of Vieillot publications. Regards.--Hector Bottai (talk) 21:33, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Hector Bottai: You are of course correct, and I have reverted that particular part of my edit. I saw it spelled as d'Éterville in English Wikipedia, but not only there but also in the French, Catalan, Finnish, Lithuanian, Galician, Romanian and Hungarian Wikipedias (links go to the respective "Vieillot" pages). To top it off Google lists it as "d'Éterville, Paris" for about 520 other (non-Wikipedia) pages, when searching for Vieillot's publications. I don't know why, but perhaps people have been confusing the Parisian publisher Deterville with the commune Éterville in northern France..? In any case that is of course no excuse for my error. I should have checked the proper sources rather than WP – however I made the edit in good faith, and it's been a long day. Or yesterday, rather, since it is past midnight here in Sweden now. :-) Anyway, now it is corrected. Thanks for notifying me, and I'm sorry for the inconvenience! Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:33, 26 June 2017 (UTC).Reply
Curious case. I never had a shade of doubt abou your good faith. By the way, I see that I edited Déterville in all of them, probably following some pre-existing citation. Work-to-do. Cheers.--Hector Bottai (talk) 23:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Dear Tommy, how do I simplify the BHL links? Can you give me a hint? Thanks in advance, Henrik, --Hwdenie (talk) 20:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Hwdenie: Sure thing, Henrik. Check any BHL page – for example BHL – and look at the index of pages in the menu to the left. Below it you will find a line with the text "URL for Current Page", with the shorter URL under it. Add the last part of the URL (the part after "") as the parameter for our BHL templates. For the above example the template would look like this: {{BHL|page/38916122}} which of course is way shorter than the long version: {{BHL|item/120095#page/277/mode/1up}}
Please also note that the "References" section should always be listed above the "Vernacular names" section (like this), and that the headlines "Synonyms" and "References" should always be in plural, even if there is only one synonym or reference listed. In the same way the "Name" headline should always be in singular, never written as "Names". –Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 23:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC).BHLReply
Thanks for your quick reply. It's quite simple indeed. Beste regards, Henrik, --Hwdenie (talk) 12:09, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Reply
Dear Tommy, you deleted W L from W.L. Sclater, however remind there are two authors P.L. and W.L. Sclater. In the IOC World Bird List these authors are mentioned with WL or PL. Best regards, Henrik, --Hwdenie (talk) 15:34, 2 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Indeed you are correct. I was surprised to see that the initials are actually included in the specific designations, since that is rather uncommon in zoology. (For instance there are a lot of authors named Smith and Wu etc, and they are seldom disambiguated by their initials – except of course in the "References" sections and in lists of publications, but that's another matter.)
Please note though that I didn't change the actual author links – they still pointed to the correct author page (see the respective Pernis steerei diff and Spilornis kinabaluensis diff for this), rather than to the generic Sclater page. Regardless of that I have now changed back to also include the initials in the rendered links. Cheers, Tommy Kronkvist, 18:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
It's OK, thanks for your rapid reaction.--Hwdenie (talk) 19:36, 2 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Templates tysp and tg

Hi Tommy there seems to be a coding problem with these two templates any ideas? Here is an example Regards Andyboorman (talk) 14:28, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Andyboorman and Pigsonthewing: Hi Andy, and thanks for notifying. This is not only an issue with the {{Tysp}} and {{TG}} templates, but also {{Lectyp}}, {{Type}} and perhaps even more. At a first glance it looks MediaWiki related rather than as a problem with our local templates as such, but I have to take a more thorough look to be sure. Unfortunately I've got a lot of offline work to do right now, so I don't think I will have time to do it until later this weekend. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 10:45, 7 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
Resolved. Somehow the wiki gnomes silently fixed this without our intervention. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:44, 13 July 2017 (UTC).Reply

Agelaioides oreopsar

Dear Tommy, this is a complex wikispecies because there are two complete different scientific names for in fact the same organism. The last version of the IOC Word Bird List and also BirdLife international again use the original "Sclater name" (Oreopsar bolivianus) and have good arguments to do that. Do we have to make two wikispecies? Or change the article name and use Oreopsar bolivianus and treat Agelaioides oreopsar as a synonym? I don't know the best solution. Best regards, Henrik, --Hwdenie (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2017 (UTC)Reply



Who is Allspecies. I suspect its an old user who is blocked. PeterR (talk) 09:38, 25 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Tommy, why don't you answer me? This is a serious problem. I see you update his reference templates. PeterR (talk) 17:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
@PeterR: The reason I didn't answer you is that I am not logged in 24 hours a day every day of the year, which I hope you understand. I have a real job too you know, I can't be online on Wikispecies all the time! And yes, I updated a few of the reference templates – but that was only 15 minutes ago!
To answer your question: Perhaps he is, but I do not know. It might be a serious problem, but we should not be too quick to judge people. Quite frankly we currently can't be sure who the user really is. For further information on the matter, please see the ongoing discussion named "Sock back?" at the Administrators' Noticeboard. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 17:45, 26 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
It is clear to me that Allspecies is the same as Stohner. The way who he is working its the same way Stohner have done. PeterR (talk) 17:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Two things: Please continue this discussion at the Administrator's Noticeboard ("Sock back?"), since this is a matter concerning all admins, not only me. Also, please remember this discussion which we had on your talk page in the summer of 2016. It regards the name of the user you refer to. Thank you. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC),Reply

DOI template

Hi Tommy Have you seen this discussion on the VP? I think that it is reasonable question. However, I see that the original template was programmed by a contributor who no longer works here. Can you help at all? Andyboorman (talk) 12:19, 30 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Andyboorman: Hi Andy. Yes I have seen that thread, and was the first one to reply to the person who started it. Unfortunately I have an exceptional offline workload at the moment, and therefore haven't got the time needed to be online here as much as I would like. I haven't checked the code of the {{Doi}} template, but it's probably fairly straightforward. I will try to take care of it in a few days, when I have more time. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:57, 30 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist: Hi Tommy. Thanks in anticipation. Mr Thorpe has some good ideas, but being a persistent sock is not one of them. Andyboorman (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I agree. As for the DOI template it is importan that we get it right, since it is used on so very many pages. Justin/Koavf might be able to help out as well. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:18, 30 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
@Andyboorman: I made the changes to the template earlier today. It should now work as we discussed on the Village Pump. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 13:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC).Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist: Seems to work smoothly. Thanks Andyboorman (talk) 17:30, 31 July 2017 (UTC)Reply


Doi template

I can't see your reasoning behind the hiding of the doi number in the doi template, which is displayed as a standard everywhere else. The elimination of the number makes the link "DOI" ambiguous and non-standard. Therefor I reverted your change. Please try discussing before implementing such important changes. Mariusm (talk) 06:11, 6 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

On seeing the discussion at the Pump I retract this. Still I think this is not a good change. See also the Template Doi [1] at the enWP. Mariusm (talk) 06:18, 6 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
As you saw at the Village Pump both systems are available, using either the {{Doi}} or the {{DOI-ID}} template. This is correspondent to the praxis at the English Wikipedia, where they use the templates "Doi-inline" [2] together with the "Doi" template you refer to above. Also, the latest edit to our VP discussion was made as recently as August 1, so the subject is of course still open for deliberation. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:18, 6 August 2017 (UTC).Reply

Nereis in italics?

Hello, Tommy Kronkvist, and thanks for your corrections of the publication list of William Henry Harvey. But why did you put the word Nereis in italics, because it is not meant as a genus name but an old word for all algae. --Thiotrix (talk) 10:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Thiotrix: I didn't know that: thank you for updating me. I've reverted that particular part of my edit. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:42, 1 September 2017 (UTC)~.Reply

"Schroder, Treadaway, Nuyda, 1993" template

(Moved to User talk:Accassidy#"Schroder, Treadaway, Nuyda, 1993" template since that's where the discussion started.)

Wilhelm August Heinrich Blasius

Dear Tommy, Something went wrong and I don't know how to solve this problem. There are now two 'Wilhelm August Heinrich Blasius taxa' categories and of course there ought to be only one. I did something wrong of stupidly. I hope you can mend it. Thanks for your help.--Hwdenie (talk) 08:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Hwdenie: I have now moved all taxon names from the wrongly named Category:Wilhelm Blasius taxa to the correctly named Category:Wilhelm August Heinrich Blasius taxa. I then deleted the erroneous category, plus the equally odd Category:Wilhelm August Heinrich Blasius that you had also created. Hence everything is now in order, so no worries! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:09, 8 September 2017 (UTC).Reply

ISSN a lemma


Hi, in this edit [3] you changed the type species from Nesohoplia senecionis, which I had written, to Nesohoplia senecionus. But as Scott himself when describing the species and naming it as the type species used the former spelling, shouldn't that be what's written? It's possible the spelling was emended later to it with a -us, but I don't see a record of that in the literature. Thanks. Umimmak (talk) 10:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Thanks for fixing my other pages; all of this is very confusing :/ Umimmak (talk) 10:21, 17 September 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Umimmak: After checking the documents more thoroughly it has became clear to me that I made a mistake, which I have now tried to correct: diff. Thank you for making me aware of this. I also added more precise information with links to the exact page numbers in the citation, in order to make it easier for other users to verify the spelling of the type species taxon name.
Feel free to ask me any questions that might help you with the – I agree! – sometimes rather confusing syntax and praxises of Wikispecies. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC).Reply

Please keep an eye on this

Hi Tommy. Could you and fellow crats keep an eye on the problem here with Iris tenuifolia and this anonymous user. I am trying to be diplomatic, but have wider suspicions. Andyboorman (talk) 09:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Andyboorman: I most certainly will. Thank you for notifying me. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 12:32, 18 September 2017 (UTC).Reply

About my Mírian N. Morales edition

Hi Tommy Kronkvist!

I did it, you've rv me diff. Maybe I ought not to do it. Thank you, for rv myself. You know it better.

But I had, and I have this problem yet. It's only one data (Property, I think) of this person (wikidata). She is a woman like we can see (representado pela Dra. Mirian N. Morales) at this reference: · · · A organização do ISS9 está acontecendo em cooperação com o Programa de Pós-graduação em Entomologia da Universidade Federal de Lavras, Lavras, MG (UFLA), representado pela Dra. Mirian N. Morales, e com o ...

I ask you for help, to introduce sex of the person to her wikidata item. Please.

My reason to go there was only the one I wrote in my summary edition at Species. Maybe I didn't explain it clearly (Do I, now?), it was (I've searched (wikidata and wikipedia) [looking for] some names: Mírian, Míriam, Mirian. [I found info only at wikidata, not at esWikipedia] Then: several people for w:es:Mirian sre: male ♂ (6), female ♀ (2) later, with: Dra. Mirian N. Morales, we've got one plus [woman, so they're three women] ♀ (3). I've written it here. May you take it into wikidata?. Help!. I cannot doing it. I don't understand yet, some procedures. I have to learn a lot about wikidata. Thanks.

PS.: Another subject/issue is my user names (it's about the central login for the wilipedias. Only one username for all). I yet have these two: w:es:Usuario:Pla y Grande Covián and w:en:User:PLA y Grande Covián. Thank you again Tommy. --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 20:46, 18 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Which works to add in pages for taxon authorities?

Hi, I was wondering if, when listing an author's works in pages for taxon authorities, one should limit them just to those works which contain taxonomic/nomenclatural acts, or if they are meant to eventually become a complete list of works by that authority. Thanks for any clarification! :) Umimmak (talk) 14:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

P.S., the brackets you removed were to indicate that, although he was the author, his name was not explicitly listed. See, e.g., [4]. Is there a better way to have done this? Umimmak (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Umimmak: Only list works regarding taxonomy and nomenclature, please. For example, Vladimir Nabokov was a renowned entomologist as well as a novel writer, but Wikispecies has no interest in also listing his fiction and novels, such a Lolita or Pale Fire – nor any of his many published chess problems, for that matter… :) Such information is better suited for Wikipedia.
As for Bassett and brackets, see this diff. for an alternative way. –Tommy Kronkvist, 14:32, 7 November 2017 (UTC).Reply
I wasn't considering adding works entirely outside the field of biology, but many works fall in between: e.g., works which discuss taxa's nomenclatural history, works which mention a taxon's name (so one gets a sense of how quickly/widespread the adoption of nomenclatural acts was). And re the bracketed example, maybe I'll just have to explain in words if the bracket isn't standard... Umimmak (talk) 14:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
P.S., re brackets see IZCN "Recommendation 51D. Author anonymous, or anonymous but known or inferred.v If the name of a taxon was (or is deemed to have been) established anonymously, the term "Anon." may be used as though it was the name of the authors. However, if the authorship is known or inferred from external evidence, the name of the author, if cited, should be enclosed in square brackets to show the original anonymity." And other style guides recommend similarly for works cited, e.g., CMoS17§14.79 "If the authorship is known or guessed at but was omitted on the title page, the name is included in brackets (with a question mark for cases of uncertainty)." I'm going to add back the bracket, although it might be useful to have an explicit note as well. Umimmak (talk) 03:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
P.P.S., ugh update it's all a moot point anyway I suppose since even though they read "nov. gen.", they were actually formally named in earlier works (with thankfully clearer authorship). I realized this after I already made a template Template:H.F. Bassett, 1882. I suppose then, there's no reason to ever cite this on wikispecies, the template should be deleted and it stricken from the list of works, then, yeah? Sorry :( :( :( I don't mean to make you spend your time just fixing all my mistakes. Umimmak (talk) 04:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
P.P.P.S., although I now see "Loxaulis Mayr, nov. gen" is a misspelling of "Loxaulus Mayr" so maybe that does make it potentially citable as creating a synonym? Particularly since one does see a few other texts referring to "Loxaulis Mayr" or "Loxaulis mammula" Sorry again for the barrage of messages. Umimmak (talk) 05:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
First of all, I think IZCN's Article 51. Citation of names of authors only refers to citing author names when referring to named taxa – not publications. In other words Article 51 is a recommendation on how to write for example "Hemigrammus Gill, 1858" but does not present any recommendations on how to cite the accompanying work "Gill, T.N. 1858. Synopsis of the fresh water fishes of the western portion of the island of Trinidad, W. I. Annals of the Lyceum of Natural History of New York 6(10–13): 363–430".
Secondly, unless we find a verifiable source of Loxaulis Mayr being accepted as a synonym, we can not use it. That might be considered original research and is a very big no-no here.
Lastly, I'll get back to you with more data on the Bassett templates. Meanwhile, do you happen to know which "Masi" is the author of Pseudotorymus Masi, 1921? The only one presently in our database is Luigi Masi, but he is listed as an ostracodologist. As for the barrage of messages – no worries! I was born in Finland, and through history we've had 750 years of barraging from both east and west. I think I can cope with a few talk page messages without any sort of problems... :) Tommy Kronkvist, 15:23, 8 November 2017 (UTC).Reply
Noted, yeah I haven't yet seen a ref explicitly place Loxaulis Mayr [in Bassett], 1882 in synonymy with Loxaulus Mayr, 1881, so then there's no reason to ever use that template.
That paper was authored "L. Masi", and unfortunately I've only seen it cited with the initial by others. I would presume the "L. Masi" is the Genoese chalcidologist Luigi Masi (1879–1961), based on the journal and the subject matter and the date and the being in Italian. Not sure if it's the same Luigi Masi already with a page, but it'd be quite a coincidence if two contemporary Italian taxa authorities had the same name... And heh okay good to know I'm not a bother :) Umimmak (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2017 (UTC)Reply


Hi. I was wondering why you reverted my edits on Sicalis... I assume there must be a good reason, but as I'm a newbie at this Wiki I'd like to learn. :) Thanks in advance. Petillés (talk) 12:20, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Petillés: and thank you for your contributions! Wikispecies is very different from the other Wikimedia sister projects, 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 much else. That includes etymology, excluding the very rare exceptions when etymologies can actually add some important information in regards to taxonomy. In other words: Wikispecies always take on a much more scientific approach, while Wikipedia is more mainstream. For more information about this, please read What Wikispecies is not. Having said that, I'm aware of the fact that we do have some 5,500 pages that includes an unwelcome section about etymology – but as with all other Wikimedia sites, Wikispecies is a work in progress... :)
–Happy editing, and best regards! Tommy Kronkvist, 16:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC).Reply
@Petillés: Well, I think that Wiktionary has already been playing the role at least in this case... Yours sincerely, Eryk Kij (talk) 17:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Tommy Kronkvist and エリック・キィ: Thank you so much for your nice replies! I was perfectly aware of the fact that Wikispecies isn't an all-you-can-eat Wikimedia project, so I searched for pages containing etymologies (finding lots of them) and I thought it was common practice. Anyway, Tommy is right: What Wikispecies is not makes it clear that paragraphs of prose aren't welcome. And Eryk, if you look carefully to the Wiktionary entry, you'll see it was me who added the info there, but I wasn't sure that putting it there was appropriate either. Kind regards to both, Petillés (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2017 (UTC).Reply

Ficus sycomorus and F. sur

Thank you for guiding me, but I still have a question. Please see this book at pages 111 and 112, where the same local name Mukuyu (orthographically mũkũyũ) is given to the two different species. How should we cope with it? My solution was providing both of them with the same name. Is there any better means? There is at least one other case similar to this one. Yours sincerely, Eryk Kij (talk) 17:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

@エリック・キィ: A further investigation proves you correct: there are several species of Ficus called "mũkũyũ" in the Kikuyu language. In fact there is even a subspecies of butterfly carrying the word in its taxon name: Charaxes cynthia mukuyu (often feeding from fig trees). I've again added the Kikuyu vernacular name to the Ficus sur page. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 08:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC).Reply

Tineidae incertae sedis


On 1 August this year, you deleted Tineidae incertae sedis. However there are 122 pages linking to it. Please can you review the situation? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:39, 23 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Andy. I'm on it – it will take about a day though. Thanks for the heads-up. –Tommy Kronkvist, 21:54, 23 November 2017 (UTC).Reply
This is taking quite a bit longer that anticipated. Partly because I suddenly got a lot of unexpected off-wiki work handed to me, but mostly due to that aside from the unwanted "Tineidae incertae sedis" links, almost all of the pages also lack all needed author templates, "Taxa named by author" categories, templated references and so forth. At least I'm now down to 60 pages, and the work continues. By tuesday it's all history. –Tommy Kronkvist, 23:51, 26 November 2017 (UTC).Reply
 Done. Tommy Kronkvist, 18:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC).Reply

Long hyphens

I thought we were using long hyphens now in citation page numbers. Neferkheperre (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Neferkheperre: Since December 2015 all of the examples in Help:Reference section use n-dash rather than m-dash. This is ISO standard and was also discussed in the talks companioning our poll about the References format (very briefly, at the very end of the thread). I have updated the "Help:Reference section" page to state this in wording as well, rather than only by example. –Tommy Kronkvist, 15:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC).Reply

Modul #invoke:VN|main

Ahoj, všiml jsem si, že u některých species čerpáme Vernacular names z wikidat. V modulu je následující problém. Při doplňování jazyka čerpá modul kód jazyka z jazyků vyplněných v položce (P1843), ale nepřiřazuje k tomuto kódu jazyka příslušný popis. Ve Wikispecies se zobrazuje název článku uvedený v interwiki. Do článku Ophioglossum vulgatum jsem se snažil to správně vložit ve Wikidatech, ale neúspěšně. översättning (Translation) (Übersetzung) --Rosičák (talk) 18:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

@Rosičák: Thank you for the information, however when looking at it now I can't seem to find any errors. I guess it is possible that the edits made by @Orchi: (after your edits) have corrected the problem? Or, maybe I'm missing something...
Sending a "ping" to @Pigsonthewing: Do you (Andy) perhaps have any ideas or explanations? The Wikidata item at hand is Q847497. (Překlad do češtiny) (Deutsche Übersetzung)Tommy Kronkvist, 21:17, 18 December 2017 (UTC).Reply
I'm relying on the Google Translation, so may be missing something: what's the error? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:54, 18 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
Ahoj, chyba? je v tom, že se jméno nepřenáší z položky (P1843). Její vyplnění nebo nevyplnění nemá na přenos k nám asi vliv. Popis se pravděpodobně přenáší z popisu položky v příslušném jazyce (eliminovány jsou shody s vědeckým názvem). Experimentálně jsem ověřil (pozměněním údajů na Wikidatech), že se chybně přenáší pravopis prvního znaku z této položky. Malé písmeno je změněno na velké . To nezohledňuje správný pravopis. Správný pravopis bohužel nepodporují ani interwiki, tam je 1. znak vždy velký, což je v mnoha jazycích chybné.
Podobná šablona existuje i na Commons. Tam je přenos názvu korektní stačí vyplnit (P1843). Viz Commons Použitím tohoto přenosu získají 24 jazykových popisů. U nás to hodí 20 názvů.
Wikidata nyní obsahují 28 interwiki 28 jazykových popisů 21 jazykových popisů (bez těch shodných s vědeckým názvem), 13 obecných názvů taxonu v položce (P1843).translate--Rosičák (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
@Pigsonthewing: I don't speak Czech but if I understand correctly, the Wikispecies {{VN}} template (and/or {{#invoke:VN|main}} string) used for example on the Wikispecies page "Ophioglossum vulgatum" doesn't properly fetch data from the Wikidata property P1843 (labelled "taxon common name" and used for example by the equivalent Wikidata Q847497 "Ophioglossum vulgatum" item). Rosičák compares this with Template:VN on Commons which according to him works better. (For reference, see Ophioglossum vulgatum on Commons.) At the time of my writing the Wikidata item for Ophioglossum vulgatum lists vernacular names in 21 languages. All of those are also present on the Wikispecies' Ophioglossum vulgatum page but for some reason the Commons ditto lists a few extra, reaching a total of 23 languages. Thats the stats when I'm checking them, right now. The odd thing is that when Rosičák wrote his last message above he claimed that Wikidata listed 21 languages. Of those only 20 were shown on Wikispecies, all while Commons went overboard and listed a whopping 24... (N.b. alternative/duplicate vernacular names is not an issue here, since we're counting the number of languages, not names.) I suspect Wikispecies lacking one language is simply a cache issue, but I guess it could also be the result of a true error somewhere in the code. I haven't studied the templates in detail, but it's apparent that the code in the Commons VN template is a lot cleaner than the Wikispecies VN code (but still manages to fetch stuff that isn't present in the database...)
The user continues to say that the Wikispecies template always render the names with a leading capital letter: "Malé písmeno je změněno na velké" = "Small letter is changed to big". This is 1) wrong in many languages, 2) not consistent with the matching Wikidata P1843 entries for those languages, and 3) not how the Commons VN template works. On Wikispecies (and contrary to Commons) all of the vernacular names are listed on separate lines and therefore should always use caps anyway – just like any other word in the beginning of a sentence. Hence this particular bug/feature isn't really a concern to us, but since Rosičák took it up I mention it for the sake of completeness. –Tommy Kronkvist, 21:07, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the clarification. I'm not a Lua coder, so can't help in that regard. However, I note that the Commons template's documentation says that "scientific name(s) are retrieved from wikicommons pagename plus wikidata property P225" (my emphasis). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Reply


Thanks for editing Adenia

--I wish Merry Christmas R C Peña — The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 01:58, 26 December 2017

I guess you mean Adenia heterophylla. You're welcome. Happy New Year! –Tommy Kronkvist, 11:15, 27 December 2017 (UTC).Reply

Muellerina eucalyptoides

I had a crack at Muellerina eucalyptoides on wikispecies.. I was hoping you might fix it up or tell me how to do so. (Thanks for the help you have already given). MargaretRDonald (talk) 00:00, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@MargaretRDonald: Hi. The page looks alright – so thank you too! I added some links to author pages, links to ISSN pages, plus a reference template, APNI, JSTOR and "Repository link" templates. (The actual pages for the latter still needs to be created though: we're sadly behind on most of the repository pages, but that's of course not related to your edit.)
It is Wikispecies' praxis not to use external links to scientific journals etc in the "Name" or "Synonyms" sections. We only use "in-house" Wikispecies links to author pages there. All links to external (i.e. non-wiki) sites are usually found exclusively in the "References" section (or a subsection thereof). Hence I moved those links to the proper section.
As a final note apparently the APNI template needs some work for better functionality and legibility. However that's not related to "your" Muellerina page either, but rather needs to be fixed on the templates "own" page. I hope to be able to look into it in the next few days, but unfortunately I'm currently somewhat pressed for time. –Tommy Kronkvist, 08:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC).Reply
Thanks for all this, Tommy MargaretRDonald (talk), 09:36, 7 January 2018 (UTC).Reply
Thanks for reverting Tieghem, 1895. (and thanks for the template example) MargaretRDonald (talk), 01:17, 8 January 2018 (UTC).Reply

An edit needed for Template:PWO

This attempt at a template is a failure.

The page Thymelaeaceae which uses it, should create the link to the appropriate page of Plants of the World online. That is, the code should retrieve the ipni reference code, recognise that ipni is referencing a family and then add #children, but if referencing a species do whatever is appropriate. (I have retained the incorrect referencing of Plants of the world in Thymelaeaceae below a correct reference, and one of the two needs deletion. MargaretRDonald (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

What do you do when a name is not the current (accepted) name?

e,g. in the pages Lagunaria & Lagunaria patersonii, Lagunara patersonii is given, but it is not the accepted name as can be seen when going to IPNI. The accepted name is Lagunaria patersonia. MargaretRDonald (talk) 08:55, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @MargaretRDonald: This is clearly an error by the original editor(s) and it is difficult to understand how this occurred given the auto-correct in INPI and other sources. Maybe the editor did not go back to the basionym, but just to the protolgue. My understanding is that Art 23 of ICBN applies to the epithet patersonius, which as an adjective then automatically becomes the feminine patersonia and this is noted on the GRIN reference. Meanwhile both pages are pretty bad and need editing. I will do this as an example that you are free to follow in the future. In addition, Lagunaria patersonii has no legitimacy and is blanked and deleted and then given a brief appearance on the list of synonyms. On another point, this example shows why it is useful to date the synonyms in order to show priority of the orthological variants. Hope this helps and I will now get on with the edits. Andyboorman (talk) 19:07, 9 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Smith, 1793

I disagree with your removal of the Wikispecies link from {{Smith, 1793}}. While the page is already linked to that via Wikidata - Q4659751 - i) the casual reader will not find it in a side-bar (as inded you did not!); and ii) the sidebar link will not appear on pages on which the template is transcluded. Unless there is some other reason for its removal, such as a prior consensus, please restore it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:44, 20 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Pigsonthewing: The Wikisource link is actually fully visible in the left hand menu: see screenshot. It's marked with a yellow "featured text" star which makes it even more visible. Having said that, I see no harm in including the Wikisource link in the template, hence I've re-added it. Also, you're of course right in that the sidebar link will not appear on pages on which the template is transcluded. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 19:25, 20 January 2018 (UTC).Reply

Penny Rose Smith

Tommy, can you handle this? "I'm Penny Rose Smith. I have created an account on Wiki Species to join the project. Could you give me a welcome page on my talk page and give me some tips, advice and some starters to help me?"
— The preceding unsigned comment was added by PeterR (talkcontribs) 16:24, 23 January 2018.

@PeterR: I saw her message on your talk page. I'm a bit busy right now but yes, I will see to it soon. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:51, 23 January 2018 (UTC).Reply

Listing an author's taxa

Hi Tommy, I have been adding 'Category: X taxa' at the bottom of taxa entries. However, not all taxa entry names correspond to the taxa name, because of the need for disambiguation. The problem can be seen if you check the taxa listed for Robert Brown. I am hoping that some smart wiki-person can fix the problem where taxa such as 'Nelsonia (ICBN)' and 'Drymophila R.Br.' are listed. MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi @MargaretRDonald: I’m on the road right now, but will sort it out as soon as I have access to a real computer (rather than my phone which I’m using at the moment). Also, please note that there should be no space after the colon in category nsmes. After all this isn’t English – it’s wiki code! :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 10:09, 26 January 2018 (UTC).Reply

Mueller reference templates

Hi Tommy, I am struggling to build

How should I deal with Eucalyptus dealbata?

Hi @Tommy Kronkvist:. If you follow the APC link to Eucalyptus dealbata you can see that this species has now been subdivided into various full species and that E. dealbata only exists as a subspecies of itself. I am not sure how to handle this in Wikispecies.. Your thoughts would be most appreciated. MargaretRDonald (talk) 01:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @MargaretRDonald: and Tommy. I read APC differently to you. I see just Eucalyptus dealbata as an accepted species with no subdivisions. Eucalyptus dealbata var. chloroclada Blakely is now Eucalyptus chloroclada (Blakely) L.A.S.Johnson & K.D.Hill and also Eucalyptus dealbata var. populnea Blakely is Eucalyptus infera A.R.Bean. They are in light blue in the list. However WCSP also shows the following homotypic synonyms for Eucalyptus dealbata - Eucalyptus viminalis var. dealbata (A.Cunn. ex Schauer) C.Moore & Betche, Handb. Fl. N.S.W.: 202 (1893), Eucalyptus tereticornis var. dealbata (A.Cunn. ex Schauer) H.Deane & Maiden, Proc. Linn. Soc. New South Wales 24: 466 (1899) and Eucalyptus umbellata var. dealbata (A.Cunn. ex Schauer) Domin, Biblioth. Bot. 89: 1021 (1928). Hope this helps. Andyboorman (talk) 10:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Tech Ambassador

Tommy, with your interest in scripts and technology, and in general being such a helpful person, I wonder if I may interest you for a function called tech ambassador, technically-minded volunteers who help other Wikimedians with technical issues, and act as a bridge between developers and local Wikimedia wikis. One goal of the ambassadors network is to make sure that users are notified of technical discussions and possible changes that impact them. The other goal is for users to get involved as peers in the development process, so that they can inform and guide software development, not just provide feedback after it's done. Dan Koehl (talk) 02:36, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hej @Dan Koehl: Yes, that is very interesting. I've actually been nurturing similar thoughts fo quite some time now, and think that the community would benefit from such a feature. I would gladly accept becoming a tech ambassador, but think we should bring it up at the Administrators' noticeboard first. Best regards, –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:42, 18 February 2018 (UTC).Reply
This function is just an informative, in fact every WS member can sign up if they want, so theres not really any need to run through Administrators' noticeboard, except for giving information. If you woud care to join, thats great, just sign up tech hereDan Koehl (talk) 14:45, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply
 Done. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC).Reply

Adding disambiguation pages

Hi Tommy, I was trying to add some plant genera with the same names as animal genera, and have no idea how to go about it. I was hoping you might point me in the right direction... Regards, MargaretRDonald (talk) 02:36, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @MargaretRDonald: For homonyms we usually add the family name within parentesis to the page name, i.e. "Genus (Familia)". Please also add any suitable pages to List of valid homonyms. –Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC).Reply
Thanks @Tommy Kronkvist:, MargaretRDonald (talk) 22ː53, 18 February 2018 (UTC).

Localization, Template Int

Hello Tommy Kronkvist, in your last edit on Carl Friedrich Philipp von Martius, you removed the translation template Int: of the "publications" heading (which worked well). What is "erroneous" in getting the headings translated? Or is there another method used at wikispecies for translations? Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 09:50, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Thiotrix: I never said that there is anything wrong with translating the headline, instead my summary text states that the {{Publications}} template itself is erroneous (which is also mentioned on the template page). The original problem was that if the template was used, clicking on the "edit" link next to the "Publications" headline didn't open a window for editing the list of publications on the same author page (in the above example Instead it opened a window for editing the actual template (i.e. That could result in honest mistakes or confusions such as this one.
Fixing the template is still a work in (slow) progress, and in November 2017 the template was sort of mended by replacing the wiki code ==Publications== with its HTML equivalent <h2>Publications</h2>. However this is nothing but a quick fix: it uses unpreferable HTML instead of recommended wiki code, and simply works by removing the "edit" link altogether. Also, the fix is revoked if the "int" magic word is afterwards added to the wiki coded heading (i.e. =={{int:Publications}}==) since the code string then again refers back to the {{Publications}} template. Not an optimal solution, in my opinion. Most of this has been discussed on several occasions, for example here:
Please note that we have a similar and equally ongoing problem with the templates {{Taxa authored}} – often abbreviated as {{Taxa}} – and {{Taxa authored 2}} (which is a temporary fork of the former, to allow for development of a version with a translatable heading). Those issues are also discussed in the VP Archive 44 thread linked above. Your skills and efforts are very much appreciated around here, and any ideas or good hands-on edits to either of the above mentioned templates are very welcome. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 03:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC).Reply
Hello Tommy Kronkvist, thank you for your answer and links to the discussions. I knew about the problems with {{Publications}}, that's why I have never used it. But "Int:Publications" is quite a different thing, it does not refer to the problematic template, but just calls the translation of the word from Wikispecies:Localization table: "Publications" (as here you see neither a heading nor the incomplete notice). The magic word "int:" works very well, as you can try for example at Kintarô Okamura: you get the edit button and it will open the section for editing. In the lower part of Kintarô Okamura, I tried also the heading int:Eponyms. This worked after inserting a line for eponyms at Wikispecies:Localization table. But I do not know much about magic wiki words, are there any reasons, not to use "int:" here at wikispecies? Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 08:55, 5 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hi again, @Thiotrix: About the "int:" magic word. I've used it before together with wiki code (syntaxed as in my =={{int:Publications}}== example above) without getting the edit link. I checked it again today, and yes as you say the edit link is very much present and working as excepted (i.e. linking to the correct page). Perhaps I was the unlucky victim of some temporary server glitch before? Who knows... Anyway now it obviously does work, which is good. Thank you for the heads up.
Thanks also for entering the English "Eponyms" keyword and its German counterpart into the "Wikispecies:Localization" table. I've since then created the equivalent pages for Dutch, French, Italian, Spanish, and Swedish. As for the "int:" magic word, no I'm not aware of any reason why not to use it in Wikispecies. We also frequently use the {{Lang}} template: see for example my latest edit to Kintarô Okamura. –mfG, Tommy Kronkvist, 13:38, 5 March 2018 (UTC).Reply
Hello Tommy Kronkvist, I was going to ask you about the same templates already mentioned here, because of your recent changes. Some users helped me with using/understanding templates recently and I also read the discussions you mentioned above. Still I would like to have some kind of confirmation whether to use the templates including the "int" or the "old ones". I'm adding information to genus and species pages (within ordo Enterobacterales) and try to follow a systematic approach, so it would be good to know if I should exchange the word in the heading (already within the page) with a localized template, resp. add a localized template when I add appropriate information, e.g. =={{int:Synonyms}}==.
And I would like to mention that the help sections (for example Help:Name section or Help:Reference section#Reference Subsections) do not give any hints on that topic. I have been reading those in order to edit in accordance with the rules, and probably other new users would act the same way. Kind regards, --A doubt (talk) 09:48, 26 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Userbox help

So I put Template:User de-2 and Template:User en-n onto my page, and this exact thing popped up: {{userboxtop}} {{User de-2}} {{User en-n}} {{userboxbottom}} Please help, GermanGamer77 (talk) 19:04, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Andy. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:00, 9 March 2018 (UTC).Reply

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

WMF Surveys, 18:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Botanical Help

Thanks so much for the speedy deletion of the photo of the famous botanist and lichenogist Roger Rosentreter. I just didn't have time enough to add to his page right at the moment and am primarily working on adding photographs- not writing articles. If you would actually like to help out there is plenty of work to be done on Wikispecies especially for plants- and you can start by adding at least one photograph of every species I've uploaded onto Wikimdia, and replacing poorer photos of the species that already have photos. Just saying if you are looking for things to do- there sure is a lot that actually needs to be added here since I've been downloading many, many species that Wikispecies and Wikipedia both do not have- as well as most other databases in the world. Please check out my contributions at to get started adding species photographs to their pages today!! Thanks for any help you can give to the world's most endangered species! ThayneT (talk) 04:20, 2 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

WMF Surveys, 01:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

WMF Surveys, 00:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Stanislaus von Prowazek

Hi! Why you revert, this is not vandalism. This is the name of this scientist in Ukrainian. What is it not entitled to exist? On Wikipedia, where I am making edits, somehow lead the reasons for the revert (undo) in a short description. Rollback should be applied only to vandalism? --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Шкурба Андрій Вікторович: Yes, I might have been too harsh or at least too quick there, and you have my apologies for not using the "undo" function instead. I am sorry.
The technical reason for reverting was that in Wikispecies we only use the Vernacular names ("VN") section for common names of taxa. We don't use it for names of persons or literature etc. The main reason for this praxis is that Wikispecies' primary scope is to serve as a database of taxa and taxonomy, but we leave the finer details about professors, libraries and type repositories etc to Wikipedia (and to some extent also Wikisource). Furthermore and as stated in Help:Vernacular names section the VN section is not an important part of Wikispecies. The reason for this is that the vernacular names almost never add any information about taxonomy or biological systematics – in other words the vernacular names are out of scope of the Wikispecies project. Unfortunately the VN help page is incomplete and in some parts also very outdated. This is true for both the English and Ukrainian versions of the VN help page. For instance the very first sentence claims that "[the VN] section provides common names in other languages and if possible links to Wikipedia pages". This was true about a year ago, but today the VN section should never contain any links to Wikipedia, since cross-wiki links are now most often automatically served by Wikidata instead. You are very welcome to correct this in the Ukrainian language version of the help page if you like to. It would be most helpful. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC).Reply
I realized the mistakes of my editing. Thank you for the kind and gracious answer. I will use your advice. I'm sorry for my bad English. --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 18:07, 24 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Шкурба Андрій Вікторович: If you wish to add the Ukrainian names of people or other entities you are welcome - indeed, encouraged - to do so on Wikidata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:09, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
I did it on Wikidata (I have there in general more than 2500 edits), I simply did not know that it was not desirable on Wikispecies. It's all right! --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Full author names


I see you direct full author names to not full author names. Our policy is to create full author names (if known). We direct no full author names to full author names. See Miguel Angel Monné. Please keep your changes after our policy. PeterR (talk) 06:31, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @PeterR: and thank you for your notification. Can you please give an example where I've used such a link, and I will be happy to fix it. Thank you. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC).Reply
PS. Do you happen to know which "Werner" is the author of Auchmomantis, a synonym of Achlaena? Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 09:14, 28 May 2018 (UTC).Reply
I have fix it already. PeterR (talk) 13:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
So far I know it is Franz Werner. In 1908 he have published a lot new species. PeterR (talk) 13:57, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Contents on talk page

Hi Tommy I seem to have lost the contents box on my talk page. Can you help me and what went wrong? Thanks Andyboorman (talk) 19:42, 1 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Andyboorman: This is very odd. Normally the table of contents is suppressed using the __NOTOC__ code string, i.e. one of the dozen or so magic words that acts as behavior switches on wiki pages. My first guess was that the magic word had been inadvertently added to your talk page. However I can't find it in the code, nor does it seem to be invoked by any of the templates currently used on your talk page. Perhaps @Koavf:, @Pigsonthewing: or @Succu: can be of assistance? Regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 21:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC).Reply
By comparing successive edits, it can be seen that the TOC (Table Of Contents) disappeared with talk:Andyboorman&oldid=3640147 this edit, which Introduced the {{Trithecanthera}} template. Disabling that template (by changing the markup from {{Trithecanthera}} to {{Tl|Trithecanthera}}) has restored the TOC. Presumably one of the templates that are used to build that template uses __NOTOC__. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Ingenious thanks! Andyboorman (talk) 11:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Andy! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:21, 4 June 2018 (UTC).Reply


Hi, It's been two years since you noticed Wikispecies about the translation project. Now I seriously think that every contributor has acknowledged the fact and it adds itself to the CentralNotice banners (now with the POTY banner). Could you remove it ? --CreativeC (talk) 15:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Pigsonthewing: Andy, since the MediaWiki:Sitenotice can be handy for future notes (not necessarily regarding translations), do you know of a way to temporarily stop it from communicating with the CentralNotice extension, without actually having to delete the page? –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:19, 15 June 2018 (UTC).Reply
No idea, sorry. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Okay, thanks. Now deleted. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC).Reply

Captions on your pics on user page

By some odd reason you only get the full captions, links and all, if you hover from the bottom of the images and up, rather from the top or sides.

For me, using chrome it works all right, from all sides, also from the top. Dan Koehl (talk) 18:17, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Dan Koehl: and thanks for your note. I've done some testing and unfortunately I can't replicate this on either of my workstations. They all run the latest versions of Windows 10 Pro or macOS, with the latest web browser versions. (Chrome, Internet Explorer, Microsoft Edge, Firefox and Opera on Windows. Apple Safari, Chrome, Firefox and Opera on macOS.) I get the same result on all platforms: the full captions only show up when hovering from the bottom and up. Also, my user page looks a lot worse in Microsoft Edge than on any of the other browsers/platforms – including the deprecated legacy version of Internet Explorer – but I guess that is unrelated. Currently I haven't got a computer running any GNU/Linux distribution, hence that is untested. Anyway and as I said, thanks for the note. :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:57, 27 July 2018 (UTC).Reply

Please, translate...

Caro Tommy, primeiro muito obrigado por resolver o erro em Automeris aqui; vi em vosso perfil que é (também) sueco, então... Trago-vos um problema com Automeris na sv-wiki: lá a Automeris excentricus está erradamente escrita como "Automeris exentricus". O erro pode ser melhor percebido no artigo da Wikipédia em português, no artigo que lá escrevi "Automeris excentricus", em sua primeira referência do "Muséum national d'histoire naturelle (France)".

De já agradecido, deixo um abraço desde o Brasil. André Koehne (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Now, the bad "translation":

Dear Tommy, first thank you very much for solving the error in Automeris here; I saw in your profile that you're (also) Swedish, so ... I bring you a problem with Automeris on sv-wiki: there Automeris excentricus is wrongly written as "sv:Automeris exentricus". The error can be better perceived in the Wikipedia article in Portuguese, in the article I wrote there ":pt:Automeris excentricus", in its first reference of the "Muséum national d'histoire naturelle (France)".
Thank you, and leave a hug from Brazil. André Koehne (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
@André Koehne:, This is strange... Automeris excentricus only get 2 google hits, (and only on pt.wikipedia), while Automeris exentricus gets over 140 hits, indicating this is actually the correct spelling? Dan Koehl (talk) 08:43, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
The species name is spelled Automeris exentricus on,,,, Arctos Database,, and Dan Koehl (talk) 08:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC). I think the spelling Automeris excentricus on pt.wikipedia may be wrong? Dan Koehl (talk) 08:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Btw, this species is not included in the list at Automeris. Dan Koehl (talk) 09:25, 27 July 2018 (UTC)Reply
Discussion continued at André Koehne's talk page.Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 16:39, 27 July 2018 (UTC).Reply

Linné not first with binominal?

Dan Koehl (talk) 21:42, 31 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Interesting, but not very surprising. I read about Artedi some years ago – not that there is very much left for us to read, except may be in Latin – and the theory of him being the "forefather" of Linnaean binominal nomenclature seems quite old, at least in respect to zoological and above all ichthyological nomenclature. Even Linnæus himself admits to this in the first edition of Systema Naturae (1735, Leiden): "Inom Ichthyologien har jag inte själv utarbetat någon metod, utan det är vår tids störste ichthyolog, den vittberömde svensken herr Petrus Artedi som har låtit oss ta del av sin egen. Han har knappt haft någon like i fråga om att särskilja fiskarnas naturliga släkten och arternas olika egenskaper. Jag bringar nu min vetgirige läsare denna, för att han här skall få se hela verkets urbild. Min lysande läsare kan inom kort invänta mera från samme man, nämligen grundsatserna (Institutiones) för Ichthyologien i dess helhet." (page 11, paragraph 4.)
In short, I feel we need more research regarding this. Thanks for the link! :-) Tommy Kronkvist, 10:49, 2 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Reference format

– Moved to User talk:Accassidy#Reference format where the discussion was initiated.

Authority birth and death data

Hello Tommy Kronkvist, I would like to ask about your edits like this. I think we had recently in the VP a decision to use either only the years, or, in the case of complete birth and death data, to use the standard ISO format, for better localization for non-english readers. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 06:03, 21 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

I guess you are referring to this discussion at the VP? Wikispecies:Village Pump/Archive 46#Birth/death dates and multilingualism. If so, I can't see that any formal decision was made – then again, you might be referering to totally different VP talk which I haven't seen... :-) Personally I prefer using years only, except when there is a risk of ambiguity as for example between Geoffrey R. Smith and Geoffrey W. Smith (by the way, in those particular examples there are no dates or years at all, so please add them if you can).
Anyway, I've reverted my edit to Lawrence Alexander Sidney Johnson, at least in regards to the date format. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 10:06, 21 August 2018 (UTC).Reply


Ahoj, vytvořil jsem 3 šablony, které by mohly internacionalizovat nadpisy v článcích

{{Vernacular names}} {{References}} {{Synonyms}}

samozdřejmě spolu s těmi, které již existují

{{Taxonavigation}} {{Name}}

Bylo by možné začlenit šablony do pomocného editačního glosáře níže (Wiki markup: )?

Wiki markup:
{{}}   {{{}}}   |   []   [[]]   [[Category:]]   #REDIRECT [[]]       <s></s>   <sup></sup>   <sub></sub>   <code></code>   <blockquote></blockquote>   <includeonly></includeonly>      {{#translation:}}   <tvar|></>   <languages/>   <noinclude></noinclude>   {{DEFAULTSORT:}}      <!-- -->  <span class="plainlinks"></span>
Wikispecies tools: {{a|}}   {{aut|}}   =={{Taxonavigation}}==   =={{Name}}==   ''{{BASEPAGENAME}}''   ==={{Synonyms}}===   =={{References}}==   =={{Vernacular names}}=={{VN|}}   [[Category:Taxon authorities]]   {{Authority control}}   {{inc}}   {{taxa}}    <includeonly>[ Reference page.]</includeonly> <noinclude>
** [{{BASEPAGENAMEE}} Find all Wikispecies pages which cite this reference.][[Category:Reference templates]]</noinclude>

--Rosičák (talk) 19:20, 26 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

P.S.:Pokud bude můj námět přijatelný, přimlouvám se za to, aby byly všechny použité nadpisy v článcích upraveny hromadnou změnou, nejlépe botem.--Rosičák (talk) 03:36, 27 August 2018 (UTC)Reply



Please can you look to the contributions from Lien Shan and Circeus? It seams to me vandalism PeterR (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

@PeterR: I can't really see anything that is out of order. Which particular edits are you referring to? Can you give me a few examples? (Also, Circeus has been an administrator since December 2015) –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC).Reply

Gratuluji k přidělení práv k překladům/Grattis till att ge översättningsrättigheter

Vzhledem k tomu, že chci projekt počeštit - převést co nejvíce do češtiny/Eftersom jag vill erövra projektet - konvertera så mycket som möjligt till tjeckiska, věnuj prosím pozornost mým příspěvkům/Var vänlig uppmärksam på mina bidrag. Zvláště na tvé diskusi a v diskusích spjatých s internacionalizací projektu/Speciellt på din diskussion och diskussioner om projektets internationalisering. Na tvé diskusi výše visí již pár dní návrh na editaci, kterou může provést pouze správce./D89/5000 Din diskussion har hängt i några dagar för ett redigeringsförslag som endast kan göras av en administratör. Vzhledem k tomu, že je návrh plný šablon překladu, může se zdát nesrozumitelný./Eftersom utkastet är fullt av översättningsmallar kan det tyckas oförståeligt.

Také chci pozádat o zapracování překladů,které jsem vytvořil inernacionalizace čeština do zamčené stránky překladů, kterou memám právo editovat./Jag vill också be om översättnings översättningar, som jag skapade internationalisering (tjeckisk) till den låsta sidan med översättningar, vilka memorier har rätt att redigera.

s pozdravem/hälsning --Rosičák (talk) 18:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Author categories by nationality

Hello Tommy Kronkvist, there are older categories for Australian Botanists, Austrian botanists, Bulgarian botanists, Pakistani botanists, Russian botanists and Turkish botanists also. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Orchi: Thank you for notifying me! I'll sort them out during the day. Regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 20:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC).Reply

Adding a description to the species

Sorry. I was enthusiastic because I found the first description of a species already proofread and looking in good shape in the wiki-world, such as it is. Is there a correct way to link a description to its point of citation here? --RaboKarbakian (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi @RaboKarbakian: Wikisource is by no means overly burdened by scientific literature within the field of taxonomy, so I can fully appreciate your enthusiasm. As for Wikispecies, all referenced material on a page should always be presented exclusively in the "References" section. For more information about the layout of Wikispecies (taxon) pages, please see Help:General Wikispecies and its subsections, including Help:Reference section. I have readapted "your" Wikisource link to the Epilobium confertifolium page you edited earlier, together with a list of synonyms and sources for them.
Thank you for your many taxonomy-related additions to Wikisource – they are most welcome! You are of course very welcome to continue contributing to Wikispecies as well. Please do not hesitate to ask me or any of the other admins/bureaucrats if you have any questions, or you can head over to the Village Pump and ask questions or discuss the project there. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC).Reply

User page

Hey, if you could protect, or semi-protect, my talk and user pages, that would be great. This is a longtime troll and harasser, tagging me on all the other wikis, the ones where I am never active. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Drmies:  Done. Semi-protection of your user page and user talk page expires October 1, 2019. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC).Reply
Thank you so much. Drmies (talk) 17:21, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Results from global Wikimedia survey 2018 are published

19:25, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

Happy birthday, Tommy! I hope you'll have a nice day together with a lot of friends! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 07:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC).Reply

Thanks! By the way... you're not getting any younger yourself: only a few left to fifty! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 07:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC).Reply
*chuckles*Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 07:16, 6 October 2018 (UTC).Reply


To advance the internationalization of the project ... I propose to comment on this proposal dated 11.10.2018.--Rosičák (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Rosibot and Rosičák: The bot is now approved for trial; please see Wikispecies:Bots/Requests for approval#Rosibot and the links found there. –Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 03:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC),Reply

Setting up disambiguation page for 2 different genera

Hello, I've just set up new page Heinsenia (Tropiduchidae). But if you enter "Heinsenia" into the "Search Wikispecies" box in the upper right hand corner, you will only get one page reference to "Heinsenia" in Regnum: Plantae. How do you get the search results to show both "Heinsenia" pages and allow a user to choose which one they want? --Nytexcome (talk) 08:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Nytexcome: Sorry for my very late reply, but unfortunately my computer is out of order. As you know from his talk page, Thiotrix has already been kind enough to take care of the problem and also explained our praxis. Hence I guess the matter is settled. Happy editing! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:17, 25 November 2018 (UTC).Reply

To undo a redirect for a questionable synonym

I'm still quite new here and trying to learn the many different aspects of editing. My question is: if and how I would go about undoing a synonym redirect. The genus in question is Raorhynchus in Familia Rhadinorhynchidae which has a redirect to genus Rhadinorhynchus as a synonym. I question the validity of this synonym since the following sources all show Raorhynchus to be a valid genus: Catalogue of Life, ITIS, BioLib, WoRMS, GBIF & IRMNG. Unless some other authority can show this to be a synonym, it would seem proper to undo this redirect and set up a page for Raorhynchus (which I will be happy to do). I just don't know how to undo the redirect. What do you think? Thanks for any help you can give. Nytexcome (talk) 04:36, 11 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Request of Translation Adminship on "Recent changes" page

Hello Tommy Kronkvist, I just noticed, that the headings of the "Recent changes" page still announce (with yellow marks) the latest request of Translation Adminship, although this was already finished. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 14:50, 20 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

 Done, I removed it, @Thiotrix:. Dan Koehl (talk) 06:59, 21 December 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Thiotrix and Dan Koehl: Thank you both. Not only is my computer acting up these days but I'm also on travel, hence can only contribute with the bare necessities. Things will be back in (and in better-than-ever) good order around New Year. Merry Christmas! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 23:55, 21 December 2018 (UTC).Reply

Template Qx

Hi, I do not disturb the existing Q template, I have exported the Q template from the Commons under the title Qx for practical use in the article PRC, see also the template makes it easy to internationalize the terms introduced as a Wikidata entry. --Rosičák (talk) 02:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply


Good day Tommy Kronkvist,
I wish you festive holidays and for the year 2019 all the best for you.
May bring us all the new year a peaceful coexistence.
Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 17:34, 23 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Orchi: Thank you for your kind words. Season's Greetings, and I wish you a happy 2019 too! –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:30, 23 December 2018 (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.