Wikispecies:Village Pump
Shortcuts: WS:V, WS:VP
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 {{Reply to}}
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:
Deeringothamnus and Asimina
[edit]I have undertaken a brief review of Asimina and the tribe Annoneae. During this I have come to the conclusion that Deeringothamnus be taken into the synonymy of Asimina rather than as a disputed segregate. I will leave off making the required redirects etc for a week or so to allow for objections and discussion. Best regards Andyboorman (talk) 09:57, 13 May 2026 (UTC)
Wm S. Wright, lepidopterist
[edit]Can we be confident that the "Wm S. Wright" who wrote Report on the Lepidoptera of the American Museum Expedition to Arizona, 1916 : Geometridae and Epiplemidae (1920; [1]) is our William Sherman Wright? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:48, 16 May 2026 (UTC)
Category cleanup
[edit]I've been cleaning up some of our category oddities and found these two, which were created by Stephen Thorpe in 2013. Can they be deleted, and what—if anything—should be done about the potential issues he described for their (few) members?
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:11, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
Eurycarpus
[edit]Our sole use of {{Fake citation needed}} is on Decapoda, in reference to Eurycarpus, which is a redirect. How should the matter be resolved, and can the template then be deleted? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:00, 17 May 2026 (UTC)
Pyrenopezizaceae (Fungi) is now a synonym
[edit]Pyrenopezizaceae in Fungi is used in the synoptic treatment by Hyde et al., 2024 (see note here) but is based on a misconception that the earlier name Ploettnerulaceae Kirschst., 1924 was a nomen nudum, when in fact it was validly published and should be used according to Baral et al., 2025 and the latest online fungal compendia i.e. MycoBank and Index Fungorum (2026 versions). I have started a discussion of this at Talk:Pyrenopezizaceae but do not really have the time or relevant in-depth knowledge of Wikispecies procedures to take it further with appropriate actions - but if anyone would like to act on this, here is your opportunity! I have just completed making the relevant changes in IRMNG (my own responsibility, shared with a few others now), see https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=11947911 and https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=11969530 . Regards - Tony Rees, Australia. Tony 1212 (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2026 (UTC)
Mineralis regnum
[edit]I propose (and lately argument) some new regnums i analized with ai, one being mineral and the other being digital. They may not seem much to argue, but to my analizis they seem to deserve mentioning as regnum, because doing so we get to see new perspective. Of course, we have yet to see if or how they do things the life does, but i have a feeling and also found arguments for this hipothesys, that they are the same, although different levels of what we call intelligence and conscience (which, ai says, do not exclude nor include eachother). I found arguments for the comunications, and having different level of purposes, relating and adapting of cristals; regarding ai, itself is very helpful understanding it's "phichology" behind it's logic. The goal is not the debate, the goal is widening horizon, transcending paradigms and ultimately understanding the matrix beyound all these. I left the spiritual regnum for some more inspired people. I do not know yet to edit wiki but i am a fast learner in ontology and epistemology matters. Feel free to contribute with anything you find or think, as people will "adjust" the content as they see fit at that respective moment. And from many moments, when you are alive, you see what you need. ~2026-30585-48 (talk) 07:16, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
- Hi ~2026-30585-48, Wikispecies uses the definition of life as at en:Life under which definition (or any other) minerals are not alive. Also AI is categorised as a simulation of life, not live, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life#Artificial . Viruses could be mentioned as an edge case, considered by some workers to be living and others non living; Wikispecies steers towards inclusiveness in this case, see Virus, although viruses are treated within Wikispecies as unranked above kingdom and realm since virus taxonomists currently recognised multiple kingdoms within that group. So your suggestion is unlikely to gain any traction here in the Wikispecies community, being based apparently on AI analysis which cannot be deemed correct at this time. Regards, Tony Rees. Tony 1212 (talk) 19:46, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
Calystegia
[edit]POWO now include Calystegia in Convolvulus; they cite this paper for the change, but the basic research appears to be here which shows that Calystegia is embedded within Convolvulus (both papers free access). - MPF (talk) 10:40, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
- Clearly both of the pages in WS need updating as soon as possible. Andyboorman (talk) 10:58, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
- Please also note the most recent relevant paper here Andyboorman (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Pindara - disambig needed plus new entry for (hemi-) homonym in Fungi
[edit]The sole current WS instance of Pindara is Pindara Moore, 1885, a moth in fam. Erebidae; however recently (2019), and accepted in both MycoBank and Hyde et al., 2024 outline of Fungi (also now in Index Fungorum, just updated; not currently (yet) on Wikipedia), the fungal genus Pindara Velenovský, 1934 is now recognised, formerly included in the genus Helvella (Helvellaceae). It would be good if WS could be adjusted to reflect this (I am happy to leave this to others more experienced than myself). References:
- Hansen, K.; Schumacher, T.; Skrede, I.; Huhtinen, S.; Wang, X.-H. (2019). Pindara revisited – evolution and generic limits in Helvellaceae. Persoonia - Molecular Phylogeny and Evolution of Fungi. 42(1): 186-204., available online at https://doi.org/10.3767/persoonia.2019.42.07
- Hyde, K. D. et al. (2024). The 2024 outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa. Mycosphere. 15(1): 5146-6239 [19 November]., available online at https://doi.org/10.5943/mycosphere/15/1/25
- MycoBank (as at May 2026): Pindara. https://www.mycobank.org/page/Name%20details%20page/97272
Tony 1212 (talk) 19:15, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thank you, Tony 1212, for these informations. I altered Pindara into a disambiguation page and will add the fungal genus. Kind regards, Thiotrix (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks @Thiotrix, looks good, I would not have been able to do such a neat and correct job! Cheers - Tony Tony 1212 (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
StaphBase ID; multiple potential Wikidata properties for ChecklistBank IDs
[edit]At my request, P14477 "Identifier for a taxon of the beetle group Staphyliniformia, in the StaphBase database" has now been created. I plan to add it to Taxonbar shortly.
It is for one of many such checklists hosted at ChecklistBank (Q139765589).
It seems to me that it would be sensible to discuss and agree criteria and a process for creating more Wikidata properties for lists at ChecklistBank, and adding their IDs to items, rather than doing so on an ad-hoc basis. Would anyone be interested in such a collaboration?
I have started a discussion on Wikidata, at Multiple potential properties for ChecklistBank IDs. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:02, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
"I plan to add it to Taxonbar shortly"
—Now done; see Hydrophiloidea, for example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:12, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Vote now in the 2026 U4C election
[edit]Eligible voters are asked to participate in the 2026 Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee election. More information–including an eligibility check, voting process information, candidate information, and a link to the vote–are available on Meta at the 2026 Election information page. The vote closes on 2 June 2026 at 00:00 UTC.
Please vote if your account is eligible. Results will be available by 14 June 2026. -- In cooperation with the U4C,
Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:14, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
Bureaucrat retirement request
[edit]I've put in a bureaucrat retirement request on Wikispecies:Bureaucrats but it's not getting any action - could people look in there, please! - MPF (talk) 15:58, 28 May 2026 (UTC)
Removal of image descriptions
[edit]Recently, User:EncycloPetey removed image desriptions linked to the depicted species from several higher taxon pages and replaced it by the "pure" image template. (Example: [2]). In our discussion about this unjustified removal of correct content User_talk:EncycloPetey#Template Image, they stated that our Help:Image Guidelines "indicates that simply placing the Image template, with nothing else, is fine.". I think our guideline needs an update to restrict this misleading sentence to articles about species and taxon authors. Thiotrix (talk) 10:20, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- The comment "No other parameters are necessary", should be amended to "No other parameters are necessary if the image is being placed on a species page." Do we also need to expand on this? Andyboorman (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- I would say yes we do for clarity. We should describe best practices rather than leaving it to chance. Also, do we still think that using the raw File placement is still just as fine as using the Image template? --EncycloPetey (talk) 11:14, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- If, for example, I place
{{Image}}on Fabaceae it gives us an attractive, but unnamed flower image. To me that is unacceptable. Other editors may beg to differ. Andyboorman (talk) 13:33, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- If, for example, I place
- Surely "species or subspecies"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:32, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- I would say yes we do for clarity. We should describe best practices rather than leaving it to chance. Also, do we still think that using the raw File placement is still just as fine as using the Image template? --EncycloPetey (talk) 11:14, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- When the image is indicated within a page here, it shouldn't be repalced by {{Image}} alone as in [3], because when nothing is specified the image displayed is the one in Wikidata. And nothing prevent that someone change the image in Wikidata with a much less relevant image. That someone (even a BOT) put {{Image}} where there is nothing yet in a Wikispecies page, ok fine, this is one thing, but when an experienced editor of Wikispecies chose a specific image, this should respected. As well as for the potential description, especially when this description countains links to lower taxa rank. I myself use this kind of stuff and I agree to amand the guideline in that way. Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
"when nothing is specified the image displayed is the one in Wikidata"
—this is intended behaviour, deployed by consensus. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:00, 1 June 2026 (UTC)- I understand and agreed with that, howether when somethig is specified, this should not be removed, that is not at all the same thing. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:04, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
I'm very strongly in favour of including a local image, and text about the location of the image selected. The image used on the wikidata page that is otherwise auto-used is frequently inappropriate here, such as a domesticated or zoo animal, or an ornamental plant cultivar, rather than a wild individual of known provenance in its native range. Images at wikidata may also get changed without any indication in the page history here. Text giving the location of the organism in the photo is particularly important, as it indicates an example of where the taxon can be found naturally, and helps with identification of subspecies, etc. - MPF (talk) 11:56, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
Gloria Z. Wurst
[edit]Do any of the works listed at Gloria Z. Wurst have taxonomic content? If not do any other works by this person? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
To all dedicated contributing members
[edit]I just want to tell all contributing members on WS, you are doing a fantastic work! How WS has exploded and grown during the years I have been involved, is simply gigantic. Many members dedicate most of their time awake to submit more records, and although you know yourself how many hours you spend on the work, somehow, your names may not be Internationally recognized, but your contribution are visible. You are heroes of the Wikispecies, and I just want to give you all, a warm and grateful THANK YOU for all you do.
Roses, beer, medals and prizes may be absent, but compliments to you all serious and hard working people, who keep WS alive, important and developing. You are stars, and its so nice to see a Wikimedia project, where almost everyone is cooperating in good spirit, and where conflicts are rare. Once again, a large tank you all, for your dedicated work. You can feel VERY proud. Dan Koehl (talk) 15:44, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
- Tell it to a mirror, DK. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:50, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
WoRMS project on Wikidata
[edit]Colleagues may be interested in d:Wikidata:WikiProject Who is who in marine taxonomy?. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:37, 5 June 2026 (UTC)