User talk:Tommy Kronkvist/Archive 2022

From Wikispecies
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Tommy Kronkvist in topic Gemmellaro case
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, please take a look at this: At the very bottom are warning signs. Although the templates are translated to them, the English-language text is displayed. Why is it?--Rosičák (talk) 15:41, 7 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello Rosičák, I guess you mean the templates in the "Pracovní šablony" subsection of that page? Is there still a problem with these? Tommy Kronkvist, 23:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC).Reply
Hi, take a look at the screen scan. The message from the template is in the articles in English, despite the fact that the template is translated. Rosičák (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

How we will see unregistered users



You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Taxonomic databases


I have more or less completed the table I mentioned on the Pump. Taxonomic databases. Thanks for editing out poor spelling etc. What do you think of the table, I may add a few more comments in due course If you feel that it maybe useful, where to put it or I could add a link to my Talk Page on the Pump? Andyboorman (talk) 16:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Andy! The Taxonomic databases table on your talk page is a great initiative, so thank you for that. However I don't really think it's "talk page material"; it's better suited as an instructive over-all Wikispecies help file than for general- or user talk related discussions. I propose we create a subpage to Help:Project sources (such as Help:Project sources/Taxonomic databases), and add a link to it on the "Project sources" page. An informative link about the new page would of course be welcome at the Pump as well. Actually, perhaps we should bring the whole issue to the Pump prior to creating any new pages, should any community member have a better suggestion for the placement of the file? –Tommy Kronkvist, 16:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC).Reply
Hi Tommy. More than happy to support this initiative. I agree we bring this to the Pump first in order to prevent wasted work. Feel free to link the discussion to my Talk Page citing my table as an example. Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 18:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Help with ref template? ⧼what are these brackets⧽


Hey, you've been kind to help me before; I tried making a ref template: {{Roberts & Brooks, 1987}}, but the subheadings for the various nomenclatural acts (other than new names) look weird with ⧼⧽ surrounding them. Do you see what I did wrong? Thanks! Umimmak (talk) 01:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello Umimmak! The problem was that you used the {{int:}} tags for automatic localization for phrases that wasn't present in our database which controls all of those translations. If the value is missing from the database, the server software returns the phrase with those weird looking brackets instead. Odd behaviour, but there you are... I've now entered the phrases "New ranks, New combinations and New synonyms" to our Wikispecies:Localization database and they should all look and work as expected from now on. (I also added an {{int:}} tag to your template, but that's a minor detail.) Happy editing! Tommy Kronkvist, 01:53, 14 February 2022 (UTC).Reply
Ah thank you! Good to know, and I appreciate you adding those localizations! Umimmak (talk) 01:57, 14 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Little debug of your userpage


Heads up: you have the text "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." toward the bottom of your userpage. Two small things: first off, in (American?) English, this should start "For some..." rather than "By some..." Secondly, the reason this caption floats in the way it does is because you have mode=packed-hover chosen along with certain lengths of text and sizes of images. If you want different displays, see mw:Help:Images#Mode_parameter and tool around with the image sizes, etc. —Justin (koavf)TCM 09:35, 23 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Request for moving


Hey Kronkvist! hope you are well. I recently translated sidebar descriptions in Bengali on my subpages (list). if you can please move these pages to MediaWiki namespaces without leave a redirect. Thank you! খাত্তাব হাসান (talk) 11:39, 12 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

@খাত্তাব হাসান.  Done. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 12:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC).Reply

Edit conflict


That's very strange!

I made this edit to the vernacular names, though without any change to the authors, not this edit. I never touched the int:Name section. I guess we were editing at the same time. It should've been an edit conflict. Instead, it seems to have saved my version (removing one of the vernacular names) by overriding yours. Maybe a bug somewhere?

Anyway, just to let you know it wasn't intentional. Kwamikagami (talk) 03:42, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wait, I made my edit almost 12 hrs after yours. How could I remove a name you'd already removed? Maybe somehow I was editing an old version of the article. But in that case there should've been a warning. This kind of thing has happened to me before, though not often. (Maybe a couple times a year.) I'd like to know what's going on so it doesn't keep happening. Kwamikagami (talk) 04:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

As you said, looking at the time-stamps in the page history it seems unlikely to be an edit conflict considering there are several hours between each of the last handful of edits. It may of course be a software bug, but more likely it's got something to do with the database cache being out of synch on one of the servers. I'll have a look at the logs and a chat with the tech overlords later today. Anyway I didn't think you had any malicious intention: that's also partly why I chose to "undo" rather than "rollback". Not that it matters much, but it looks a bit better in your user statistics. :-)
By the way. I guess you already know this, but just to make sure: The reason we should always use the full author names in links is that while author abbreviations are unique for any author within the field of botany, in zoology they are not. See for example Anderson and Young, which does not link to the botanists James Anderson and Thomas Young even though their IPNI abbreviations are indeed "Anderson" and "Young". Instead they are links to disambiguation pages, listing almost a hundred different Andersons and Youngs.
Among the botanists there's only one each with the IPNI standard form Anderson and Young, but there are virtual cohorts of other authors with the same surnames and in theory any of the zoologists in those lists can be referred to as "Johnson" or "Young". In order to avoid misunderstandings we therefore always link to the actual author page e.g. {{a|Thomas Young|Young}}. It will still look like Young but links directly to the specific author rather than to the disambiguation page mentioned above. This is also why our naming scheme for author pages is to always try to name them after each respective authors full name (when we know them) instead of using initials. Sometimes that's not enough. For example there are several authors named "James Anderson" – the page for the one mentioned above can be found at James Anderson (botanist, 1738–1809). And Bob's your uncle. –Tommy Kronkvist, 05:18, 17 March 2022 (UTC).Reply

Philyra bicornis


I am kinda confused why you replace P.K.L.Ng with just only Ng. Is it the agreement in the wikispecies cause so many website and literature use P.K.L.Ng as taxa name. Thank you Agus Damanik (talk) 20:34, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Yes, for zoologists we generally only use the authors surname/family name in the Name section. Botanists are different, since they (usually) have a standard IPNI abbreviation (listed at The IPNI standard ID is unique for each botanist = not shared with any other botanist. The author abbreviations of zoologists are generally not unique, and are often shared by many other authors: see for example Li.
It is however important that we always lists authors as "Surname, Initials" in the References section, for example as Ng, P.K.L. There we never lists the authors only by their author abbreviations, and never only by their sunrname (since there are many Ng, Li, Smith, etc.) Hence, if a user is unsure which "Ng" is listed in the Name section, he can always make sure by checking the (for example) Ng, P.K.L. link in the References section.
I actually don't know why we've chosen this system, but it's been the Wikispecies praxis for many years. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 21:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC).Reply
Okay. actually the naming makes it easier for me. Thanks Tommy. Agus Damanik (talk) 21:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply
Just a last note, for the sake of completeness: There are a few cases where this system is less than ideal, for example the Megathymini page which lists the two authors as "Comstock & Comstock, 1895" in the Name section. The two author links are different though, and of course the initials are added to their names in the References section, listing them as "Comstock, J.H. & Comstock, A.B. 1895" (they were husband and wife). –Tommy Kronkvist, 21:25, 23 March 2022 (UTC).Reply
Okay. I got it. Thanks for the information and insight Agus Damanik (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply



Hi, this template is currently listed in the section broken pages at Special:PageTranslation. It would like to fix this, but the page is protected. Could you temporary lower the protection of that page? Thanks, --Ameisenigel (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Ameisenigel: Sorry for my late reply, but things are busy IRL. The status of Template:Rfcheader is now changed to semi-protected for one week (eg. only protected from IPs and newly registered accounts), which should make it possible for you to make the necessary fixes. Thanks for bringing this up, and happy editing! Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 07:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC).Reply
Thanks, the template is now fixed. --Ameisenigel (talk) 09:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for help with O. barbadensis


Many thanks for tidying things up at the newly-established page for Oliva barbadensis – much improved!

I have now uploaded an improved (lighter brighter colour) version of the photo of the holotype of Ol. barbadensis to Wiki Commons and have included this improved photo on the newly-established WikiSpecies listing, just mentioned. BathyMetrix (talk) 23:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Reply




I have a question. Is it possible to publish here list of publications in Russian? I don't see them in Russian on any page. But self-translation of titles would violate the rules of Wikipedia. But if there are lists of publications in Russian, then it will appear in Arabic, Chinese or Japanese. What do you think about this? Is there any accepted decision of the community on this problem? Hunu (talk) 09:10, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hunu. Yes, that is possible. Wether or not a publication uses Latin script or not isn't important. The Wikispecies praxis and recommendation is really quite simple: please use the same actual title/language of the work that you are referring to. So if you are referring to an article in Russian, use the Russian title and text. See for example the Tatyana Valerievna Krestovskaja page on how this can be done. The same goes for any other language, such as Italian, Chinese, or Arabic, etc. See for example the Solomon Markovich Herzenstein page which refers to an article written in German published in a journal with a French title, printed in Russia (i.e. Saint Petersburg).
A few words on translations. Sometimes Wikispecies authors add an Engish translation to the journal's title, such as for the publications on the Krestovskaja page mentioned above. This is optional, but personally I think it's helpful.
In other cases our editors refer to articles that are published as English translations of original work. In that case the English title should be used, since the editor is actually referring to the translated version, and not the original.
–Thank you for your contributions! Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:04, 10 July 2022 (UTC).Reply
Tommy Kronkvist, thank you for answer. Now I understand, but I suppose that it's better to use original translation from English abstract. Regulalrly all russian articles have English or German (mainly in 1880-s-1920-s) abstract. But Sometimes they have funny mistakes too. Or may be could we mark self-translations some way? Hunu (talk) 14:15, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hunu: Do you have an example of such a case, with a "funny" or odd mistake? It would help me understand the problem.
Also, what do you mean by "self-translations"? Perhaps you mean "automatic translations"? As far as I know automatic translations are only made by Wikimedia servers if we manually add the int: tag, as we for example do in paragraph headlines such as =={{int:Publications}}== and =={{int:References}}==. Words surrounded by the int: tag (for example "Publications" and "References") are automatically translated using the table that can be found here: Wikispecies:Localization. (As you see there are still many red, untranslated links there. We need to work on that.)
I don't think other words are (automatically) translated. The exception is of course where the whole page is translated, as for example the Russian translation Заглавная страница of our English Main Page. But those pages are all manually translated, and can be easily fixed if incorrect. I'm sorry if this is all a bit confusing... :-) Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:52, 10 July 2022 (UTC).Reply
Sorry for poor English. "Self-translations" is when somebody translate from original language to English or another widely distributed language. This can potentially lead to the title of the same article existing in many different versions and sometimes it is difficult to tell if it is the same article or different ones. I suppose that any translation of titles by participants of the project could be some kind "original research" en:Wikipedia:No original research. But if the community of Wkispecies decides that it is allowed, I can easily agree with this.
Funny mistakes: I don't have access to the specific article right now, but here's what I remember from memory. Pika (Ochotona) is пищуха in Russian. But Treecreeper (Certhia) is пищуха too. And several times pikas were called treecreepers in English summaries of Russian articles. Hunu (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Language Templates wanting


Dear Tommy, could you please help to edit the author Dmitry A. German to Dmitry Alexandrovich German. Anna PavlovaIFPNI Staff (talk) 17:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear Anna, I have now moved the page so that the main author page is Dmitry Alexandrovich German, per your request. I have also edited all links to the old "Dmitry A. German" page so that they link to the new "Dmitry Alexandrovich German" page instead, and changed all "Category:Dmitry A. German taxa" links to the new "Category:Dmitry Alexandrovich German taxa" category. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 20:08, 11 August 2022 (UTC).Reply
Dear Tommy! You are great - thank you! Anna IFPNI Staff (talk) 20:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Morales disambiguation page wanting


Dear Tommy, could you please help to create the disambiguation page for synonymic now taxon Morales (Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. 1835), which is coincided with Morales authority. Or to do something else? Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 09:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear Anna, My plan is to change the current Morales page into an author disambiguation page (example: Correa (disambiguation), and then create a new "Morales" page for Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. 1835. However it may take some time since there are 24 taxon pages that links to the current "Morales" page. The links are not for taxa, instead they are all unresolved author names. I need to correct the author links on all of those 24 taxon pages first, so that they are linked to the correct author pages (for example Clare F. Morales instead of Morales on the Basilioterpa page). Otherwise all of those 24 author links will link to the new Morales Mart. taxon page (when created), which would of course be incorrect. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 18:40, 16 August 2022 (UTC).Reply
Thank you - no rush! But only you have the power to be magic with such edits)) Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hello again, Anna. I have now (finally…) corrected all of the 24 taxon pages I mentioned above, so in theory it would now be okay to move the current "Morales" page to a new Morales (disambiguation) page, listing all of the authors. The "Morales" page name would then become available as a taxon page for Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. 1835.
However, as far as I can see Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. 1835 is still considered a synonym of Rosales Bercht. & J.Presl, Přiroz. Rostlin 231 (1820). I'm not a botanist so I may be wrong about the current taxonomical situation/synonymy, but here at Wikispecies we usually don't create taxon pages for synonyms. Perhaps my fellow administrator and botanist @Andy Boorman can help us out with this discussion? Kindly, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC).Reply
Yes! Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. (1835) is still considered a synonym of Rosales Bercht. & J.Presl, Přiroz. Rostlin: 231 (1820) under the APG classification where Urticales and its families, are embedded under Rosales. See APGIII, Reveal, 2012 and APWebsite. Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 18:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

────────── The issue is probably resolved then. I've added Morales Mart., Consp. Regn. Veg.: 14. (1835) to the Morales disambiguation page. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:35, 14 October 2022 (UTC).Reply

Correction of full author's names


Dear Tommy, is it possible to ask you to correct through your magic bots the author's name Alexandre Fedorovich Bannikov to standard Alexander Fedorovich Bannikov? With thanks, Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Tommy, thank you. And just additional Uzbek author: A.M. Makhmedov to Akram Mamazhonovich Makhmedov. Thank you! Anna IFPNI Staff (talk) 14:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Hello, Anna Done. Only 38 edits so it was a rather quick fix. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 19:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC).Reply
You are magic! Thank you! Anna IFPNI Staff (talk) 23:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Dear Tommy, is it possible to help with [Olga Dmitrievna Nikiforova], which should be instead of [O.D. Nikiforova]. A lot of minor links and references, Anna IFPNI Staff (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
Dear, Anna. I have moved the author page and the "Taxa by author" category. I have also changed all Wikispecies-links in any of the related pages, so all of the links that were pointed to O.D. Nikiforova now points to either Olga Dmitrievna Nikiforova or Category:Olga Dmitrievna Nikiforova taxa instead, including the links in the related reference templates. I have also changed the Wikispecies-link in Nikiforova's corresponding Q21522163 Wikidata item in order to reflect this change. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 08:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC).Reply
Magic help! Thank you!! Anna IFPNI Staff (talk) 10:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Ochotona spanglei


As I understand this extinct pika has wrong authors. It should be:

Ochotona spanglei Shotwell, 1956

I was not able to correct for some unclear reasons. Thank you in advance Hunu (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hunu. Thank you for the notice. It took me a long time, but now I think the Ochotona spanglei page is correct. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 02:35, 5 October 2022 (UTC).Reply
Thank you for correction. Hunu (talk) 05:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Request for help


Dear Tommy Kronkvist, Could I ask ask about some help? Could you divide the File:Recherches pour servir à l'histoire naturelle des mammifères (Pl. 38B) (7093187399).jpg for 3 drawings: upper and two lower? The problem is that I have new hard disk without good picture editor. But I found unpleasant mistake in WP. The picture of Scaptonyx fusicaudus is not this species, but Crocidura attenuata. Thank you in advance Hunu (talk) 10:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Hunu: Sure, I will take care of this later today, and send you links to the new, divided pictures when ready. It may take a few hours though, since I have some "administrator stuff" to tend to first. Kind regards, –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC).Reply
OK, Thank you. I' m looking forward. Hunu (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
@Hunu: I think the Scaptonyx fusicaudus and Crocidura attenuata pages now both have the correct images. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC).Reply
Yes, completely correct. Thank you Hunu (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply



Please block User:中央連線, see CA, thanks!--MCC214 (talk) 11:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello MCC214. Thanks for pointing out possible problems, but as far as I tell see user 中央連線 (editsactions logdeletedblock logglobal) hasn't yet made any edits to Wikispecies and hence shouldn't be blocked. That doesn't really matter though, since the user account was globally locked from all of Wikimedia earlier today.
For future requests please use the Administrators' Noticeboard instead. There you'll probably get a quicker response since the noticeboard is monitored by all administrators, and not only me. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC).Reply



Hello! The use of shortcuts are not prohibited or advised against, so please do not insist on changes as has been done recently. For example change shortcut rl for Repository link or ResGate for ResearchGate Publication. I use it in my edits and I will always use it because it makes editing easier, that's what they are for. I do not agree with that kind of changes, except of course if the community discusses and agrees on the abolition of these shortcuts and redirects. Regards, Burmeister (talk) 23:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello Burmeister, and thank you for your note. It's true that the community hasn't "discussed and agreed upon the abolition of these shortcuts", but on the other hand I don't remember any discussion where we decided to use them either? But that's not really the issue here, so lets move forward:
I fully understand your position, and quite frankly I agree that the shortcuts are much easier to use than the actual names of the templates. From that perspective I fully agree with you. My only objection to the use of these shortcuts is that they may make it more difficult for new users. Sure, it's a lot more time-consuming to write {{Repository link}} than the {{rl}} shortcut, but for a new user it might not at all be clear what "rl" refers to, while the phrase "Repository link" is self-explanatory and easy to understand. However: yes, I will stop changing your shortcuts in the future, since there's no community consensus in this matter. By the way I've added a {{Repository link|}} command to the MediaWiki:Edittools so now it's easier for all users to add the template to taxon pages, simply by clicking a link below the edit window (it's between the {{int:Type locality}} and {{VN|}} links).
While on the subject of irregular edits, I see that you recently made this edit to the Oxybelis wilsoni page. I find it an excellent contribution in almost every way, since you added author templates, the nice Villa & McCranie, 1995 reference template you recently created, an "Image" and "taxonbar" template, plus the "Taxa by author" categories etc, etc. Good work! There is one minor detail though, namely the leading bullet symbols in front of the holotype and type locality data in the "Name" section. That's not in line with our Help:Name section guideline. Again I actually agree with your preferred layout – I think it is more legible and looks a lot better – but as far as I know it's not something the community has agreed upon yet. (Which in a way is understandable: it's a very small detail, and we have bigger and more important issues to decide upon first.)
Again thank you very much for your contributions: I'm sure that not only me, but a lot of our users find them valuable. Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist, 05:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC).Reply
Well, I'm not the only one that not follow "Help:Name section guideline" strictly! And if we back to the past, most of the proposals present there were not discussed by the community, or were approved by consensus or vote. If I wrong you can provide the TheVillagePump item for that discussion. That guideline is outdated, it's time to take a further discussion of page style! I will continue use bullet symbols in name section, as you say is more legible and more consistent since their use is tolerated in synonyms, I don't see why not use them in the main name too, both are lists in essence. Regards, Burmeister (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
I'm of course well aware that many users fail to follow some (or in some rare cases even any...) of the many guidelines. That can sometimes lead to rather noticeable problems (on the Yves Gomy page, to name one) but most often it's not that apparent. As for the preferred format recommended in the "Help:Name section guideline" I have a faint memory that we partly discussed it around the same time as our poll about the References format. But that was way back in 2015, the talks went on for months and worst of all they where not exclusively held on the Village Pump, but on several other talk pages as well. And as you say the community didn't reach a consensus and no votes were cast.
You're perfectly right that the guideline(s) are outdated and should be overhauled. One problem with that again revolves around user friendliness. I'm sure it can be quite daunting for a newly registered, unexperienced user to be faced with "help" page that lists a plethora of examples à la
{{int:Holotype}}: {{rl|SMNH|NRM}} 69501, 65.8 mm ♀ ({{a|Jerzy Prószyński|Prószyński}}, 1983)
We need to find a way around that, while still maintaining all the needed functionality. Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 10:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC).Reply

More correction of full author's names


Dear Tommy, is it possible to ask you to correct through your magic bots the author's name Vladimir S. Kononenko to standard Vladimir Stepanovich Kononenko and Oleg Grigor'evich Kussakin to Oleg Grigorievich Kussakin? Too much edits are necessary. With thanks, Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 21:52, 17 November 2022 (UTC). (Reedited 12:36, 19 November 2022.)Reply

I agree – a total of 525 pages needs to be changed, so quite a lot of edits. I'll see to it this Saturday. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 03:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC). (Reedited 11:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC).)Reply
 Done. Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:14, 20 November 2022 (UTC).Reply
Magic! Thank you!!!! Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Need help to correct


Dear Tommy, is it possible to ask you to help me to correct the necessitated renaming of Reticulariinae to Reticulothyridinae? I confused with some links, and proposed to delete Reticulothyridinae as erroneous entry. Please help, Anna Pavlova — The preceding unsigned comment was added by IFPNI Staff (talkcontribs) 18:46, 20 November 2022.

Dear Anna Pavlova, I've moved Reticulariinae to Reticulothyridinae and added "Reticulariinae" as a subfamily on the that page. You may still need to fix the list of genera there, since after the page move I don't know if all of the listed genera are actually members of Reticulariinae, or perhaps some other subfamily of Reticulothyrididae?
I think that the whole Reticulothyridoidea superfamily may need some work. It looks somewhat outdated with old and/or incorrect Taxonavigation templates, and missing lists of species, etc. Please feel free to ask if you need any more help! Kind regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC).Reply
Thank you! I will check it today, Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 11:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Gemmellaro case


Dear Tommy, please help to resolve links (to reverse them?) from the full name Gaetano Giorgio Gemmellaro to incomplete name Gaetano G. Gemmellaro. Thank you in advance! Anna Pavlova IFPNI Staff (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Dear Anna, I'm not sure I understand? "Gaetano Giorgio Gemmellaro" was his ful name, was it not? In that case that page should be the "main" page (which it is), and "Gaetano G. Gemmellaro" should be redirected to "Gaetano Giorgio Gemmellaro" (which it does). There are only three pages that links to "Gaetano G. Gemmellaro", namely this talk page and two log pages by User:Korg. The same goes for the "Gemmellaro" redirect page: only the same two Korg log pages links to that page. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 15:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC).Reply

Hooker's Journal of Botany and Kew Garden Miscellany


Notice that you have added a contribution to this taxon that has deleted all the templates that were listed in it. Now if you add a template the full page appears destroying the edition. I would appreciate it if you could correct this anomaly. Greetings.--MILEPRI (talk) 12:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I have already solved it. It was a mistake on my part. Forgive the inconvenience.--MILEPRI (talk) 16:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
No problem, and nice that it got corrected. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 14:22, 2 December 2022 (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.