Shortcuts: WS:V, WS:VP

Wikispecies:Village Pump

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome to the village pump of Wikispecies. This page is a place to ask questions or discuss the project. If you need an admin, please see the Administrators' Noticeboard. If you need to solicit feedback, see Request for Comment. Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~ or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar). Use the Wikispecies IRC channel for real-time chat.

If you're going to critique the work of fellow editors (blatant vandals excepted) in your post on this page, you should notify them, either by mentioning them with a {{Ping}} template, or with a post on their talk page.

If you insert links to Wikipedia pages in your comments, don't forget the leading colon (:) before the wiki language code (including when you reference a remote user page instead of using a local signature), otherwise it will generate spurious interwiki links collected in the sidebar instead of in the expected location within the discussion. Thanks.

Village pump in other languages:

Post a comment
if you use the title box, you don't need to put a title in the body
1 (2004-09-21/2005-01-05) 2 (2005-01-05/2005-08-23)
3 (2005-08-24/2005-12-31) 4 (2006-01-01/2005-05-31)
5 (2006-06-01/2006-12-16) 6 (2006-12-17/2006-12-31)
7 (2007-01-01/2007-02-28) 8 (2007-03-01/2007-04-30)
9 (2007-05-01/2007-08-31) 10 (2007-09-01/2007-10-31)
11 (2007-11-01/2007-12-31) 12 (2008-01-01/2008-02-28)
13 (2008-03-01/2008-04-28) 14 (2008-04-29/2008-06-30)
15 (2008-07-01/2008-09-30) 16 (2008-10-01/2008-12-25)
17 (2008-12-26/2009-02-28) 18 (2009-03-01/2009-06-30)
19 (2009-07-01/2009-12-31) 20 (2010-01-01/2010-06-30)
21 (2010-07-01/2010-12-31) 22 (2011-01-01/2011-06-30)
23 (2011-07-01/2011-12-31) 24 (2012-01-01/2012-12-31)
25 (2013-01-01/2013-12-31) 26 (2014-01-01/2014-12-31)
27 (2015-01-01/2015-01-31) 28 (2015-02-01/2015-02-28)
29 (2015-02-28/2015-04-29) 30 (2015-04-29/2015-07-19)
31 (2015-07-19/2015-09-23) 32 (2015-09-23/2015-11-21)
33 (2015-11-21/2015-12-31) 34 (2016-01-01/2016-04-17)
35 (2016-03-22/2016-05-01) 36 (2016-05-01/2016-07-12)
37 (2016-07-13/2016-09-30) 38 (2016-10-01/2016-12-04)
39 (2016-12-04/2017-01-17) 40 (2017-01-18/2017-01-28)
41 (2017-01-29/2017-02-13) 42 (2017-02-14/2017-03-21)
43 (2017-03-20/2017-08-11) 44 (2017-08-10/2017-12-07)
45 (2017-12-08/2018-01-08) 46 (2018-01-19/2018-03-11)
47 (2018-03-11/2018-09-11) 48 (2018-09-01/2018-10-11)

Possibly duplicate author pages[edit]

These author pages are possibly duplicates. As they concern zoologists, I ask the zoology editors to check them and please merge, if necessary:

Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 20:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Please also check Sebastian Rosenfeld and Sebastián Rosenfeld. DGtal (talk) 12:49, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Bot needed[edit]

Hello folks. Can anybody write a bot to get rid of la="taxon name" from the VN section? Latin is not a vernacular name after all. It is getting a bit frustrating to remove it manually every time I come across it. Thanks once again. Andyboorman (talk) 13:59, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps a job for @KoehlBot:? The |la and spaced | la part would most likely be easy to get rid of, since that portion of the string is more or less identical on all of the taxon pages. For the rest of the string (i.e. the equals sign, any white space, and any letters) I think a fairly simple regular expression would suffice. It should be set to remove everything after la until it reaches a | pipe (i.e. when it reaches the next VN language) or a } curly bracket (i.e. the end of the VN template).
If a remember correctly the regular expression for finding any character is (.) where the round brackets acts as delimiters from the rest of the code string. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:04, 8 January 2019 (UTC).
Yes, @Tommy Kronkvist, Andyboorman:, Ill try it out, maybe today. Dan Koehl (talk) 10:12, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
@Tommy Kronkvist, Andyboorman:, I think now it is working. Maybe it would be wise to stop editors from inserting any more |la= ?? Dan Koehl (talk) 13:34, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
@Dan Koehl, Tommy Kronkvist, Andyboorman: Thanks Dan. I will post a message to the effect of not adding |la=. Best Regards Andyboorman (talk) 13:58, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
@Tommy Kronkvist, Andyboorman:, after doing some succesful trials at my personal user account, I have not yet identified any errors, so now I let User:KoehlBot continue this task, which means the edits will no longer be visible on recent changes, unless Bot edits is chosen. If possible, please help me check a couple of times, that the Bot is working properly. Dan Koehl (talk) 15:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

@Dan Koehl, Andyboorman: I've checked all of the (currently) 68 edits made by KoehlBot in regards to this issue, and all of them are good. Also, I've added the following segment to the Help:Vernacular names section help page in order to point out this whole thing:

"Please note that while most scientific names use Latin grammatical form they are most often not to be considered proper Latin. Hence the correct Latin vernacular name of a taxon is very seldom identical to the scientific name of said taxon. As an example the Latin vernacular name for domestic cat is not Felis silvestris catus, but "cattus".

I think the VN help page needs to be further updated to state that we only recommend modern languages in the VN list, and that all dead languages – Latin included – should be left out altogether. Quite frankly the entire VN help page is in need of a total remake, but in all honesty I currently don't feel up for the task... –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 00:19, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

Close discussion Vernacular names on RFC?[edit]

Can someone who hasnt participated in this discussion please make an estimate of the consensus, and close the discussion Should the names in the == Vertacular names == section be spelled correctly? Dan Koehl (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I will take care of it tomorrow (busy today). –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 04:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC).


Latin is not a Vernacular Name, please refrain from adding |la= to the Vernacular Name section. A bot has gone through editing out existing occurrences, so please do not add new ones. Regards Andyboorman (talk) 14:00, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Of course, there had existed Latin vernacular name in ancient times, but it is nonsense to add scientific names as "Latin vernacular names". Anyway, also adding the ancient names does not make much sense, as it is often not very clear, which plants were meant, when ancient authors as Plinius, Vergilius etc. used a name. For example, I now have found, that Prunus avium originally would have been named "cornum" or "durum" in Latin. (The first later shifted to Cornus mas.) However, even the ancient author, who wrote this in a commentary on Vergilius, might have reported only contemporary speculations. Later the name "cerasus" was adopted from Greek, which probably came with imported Prunus cerasus. Anyway, vernacular names should be restricted to living languages. Probably nobody here wishes vernacular names from Gothic, Old English or Middle High German, or even Hittite, though there certainly such have existed. --Franz Xaver (talk) 23:34, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


I never stumbled about that kind of rank before? Is it really in use? --Succu (talk) 20:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Dominion (latin: Dominium) was proposed by Moore (1971, 1974) as a taxon above the rank of kingdom. The same concept was later articulated by Woese et al. as their "Domain" (no latin equivalent). "Domain" seems to have achieved currency, "Dominion" not so. "Subdominium" seems to be used by only one author, Stefan Luketa, in a 2012 treatment, for Subdominium Unikonta vs. Subdominium Bikonta. Elsewhere these clades are recognised, if at all, as superkingdoms. So "Subdominium" could remain for that 1 treatment, or be dropped, I guess...
Moore's (1974) proposal was a submission for consideration for the 1978 (Leningrad) Botanical Code, but was not adopted therein or since.
Regards - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 03:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[edit]

Hi, I saw a phab task to make a wikiquote test wiki with Wikibase, the extension that runs Wikidata. I think it would suit species well, what do you think about a wikibase species wiki test ? --CreativeC (talk) 06:23, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

There has been a lot of discussion adjacent to this but basically that would duplicate d:. See d:Wikidata:Wikispecies. —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:48, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
@Justin Maybe it would be a good trial to see whether species should be merged into Wikidata or not --CreativeC (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I don't think so, mostly because Wikidata doesn't handle the taxon/name dichotomy well at all. Specifically, it treats name as properties of taxa, when to be functional, species: absolutely needs them to be separate entities (in fact, having synonyms and other things that are not explicitly taxon causes the system to spazz out). That's not to mention the ridiculous amount of editing required in wikidata to disentangle slready created name+taxa entities. Circeus (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
I have made similar experience with wikidata. As it works now, it would not be able to render all information from wikispecies. Probably it is not worth to make this trial. I don't know, which problems would be solved by merging WS into WD. However, it would be a big challenge. If it ain't broke don't fix it. --Franz Xaver (talk) 14:43, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

« If it ain’t broke, improve it » ? It is not about merging WS into WD anyway but to test a « Sturctured Wikispecies ». --CreativeC (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


hi wikispecies have 658 articles but in this site have 671 articles why Amirh123 (talk) 08:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)