User talk:Sieoos

Copy+paste moves

Hi! As far as I'm aware, you're not supposed to copy+paste contents of one page to another, like you're doing with Vicugna pacos to Lama pacos for instance, but instead move the page itself to a different title. That way all the edit history stays with the current version of the page, and not on what is now the redirect you just created at the old title. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I didn't know I could do that. Thank you. Sieoos (talk) 13:45, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, nice that you know now! :-) This is actually a quite important matter in terms of copyright issues, origin and verifiability of the data sources, etc. –Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 06:00, 2 May 2024 (UTC).

Wikipedia

Hi again! I notice in a lot of your edit summaries you say you're using Wikipedia's sources for your changes. Honestly fair enough, Wikispecies is rather outdated in some areas. But be careful, since Wikipedia can also be outdated or sometimes even completely wrong, so it is better to find the actual scientific works that supports what you're doing first.

To take an example, I saw you changed the type species of Araneus from Araneus angulatus to Araneus diadematus based on en:Araneus. While I know that the statement that Araneus angulatus is the type species probably comes from {{Opinion 2224}}, I do not know at present why en.wiki states that Araneus diadematus is the type species instead. I'll find out if maybe that is a mistake there or not. Monster Iestyn (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

...Okay yeah, in this case 1) the Araneus article's infobox on Wikipedia has displayed "Araneus diadematus" as the type species since 2007 (see [1]), 2) a case submitted to the ICZN (the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature) also in 2007 proposed to set Araneus angulatus as the type species instead (see [2]), and 3) this was confirmed officially by Opinion 2224 (linked above), and so Araneus angulatus is used as the type species in most if not all scientific publications and databases since such as at the World Spider Catalog. So, Wikipedia is the one that is outdated in this case, and I'll fix that now. Monster Iestyn (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I misunderstood. Thank you. Sieoos (talk) 13:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

┌────┘ ​Hello Sieoos. Please stop referring to references cited at Wikipedia without adding the actual citations. All additions to Wikispecies must be based on verifiable sources, in the same way as in Wikipedia. Thank you. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 22:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC).

I apologize. Sieoos (talk) 16:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Images

Hello, I see you are updating some of the images here - I think, from past discussions, the general idea is to avoid where possible photos of animals in captivity; thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

I see. Sieoos (talk) 15:15, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

[3] & [4] - replacement images, amongst others, still of captive specimens, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 06:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I sometimes can't tell the difference. Sieoos (talk) 13:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Ok - if you find image interpretation and selection a bit tricky, perhaps concentrate on text-related editing? Thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 18:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay then. Sieoos (talk) 20:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello again Sieoos. Please start to add more informative edit summaries in your future contributions. An edit summary like for example "Yeah, maybe it's better like this" (as you entered here) doesn't really say anything about your actual edit, hence isn't at all helpful to our other users. In that particular case, a better edit summary would be for example "Replaced Cladus: Cetaceamorpha with Subordo: Whippomorpha." That's a lot more descriptive and to-the-point, and more accommodative towards our fellow community members. Thanks beforehand!

Please see Recommendations for edit summaries at MediaWiki for Wikimedia's policies and guidelines regarding this subject.
–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC).

I'll make sure to do so. Sieoos (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Pancarnivora

Hello, your move of Pancarnivora to Pan-Carnivora, with the edit summary "fixing", appears instead to be "breaking" (or at least iconoclastic). According to the ICZN, hyphens are not to be used, Article 27, other than in the case of Article 32.5.2.4.3 (" If the first element is a Latin letter used to denote descriptively a character of the taxon, it must be retained and connected to the remainder of the name by a hyphen"), of which this is not an instance. According to the scope in 1.2.2, "The Code regulates the names of taxa in the family group, genus group, and species group. Articles 1-4, 7-10, 11.1-11.3, 14, 27, 28 and 32.5.2.5 also regulate names of taxa at ranks above the family group". So, the ICZN seems to say no hyphen - and unless you are trying to assert independence from it, Pancarnivora looks like the proper orthography; thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Or.. is your argument that Phylocode 10.3 applies? I had worked on the basis that the clade as an intermediate step is equivalent to an intermediate rank, even if "unranked", i.e, the exact positioning of the rank is unspecified; thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

I had no idea. It must be Wikipedia's use of the hyphen that motivated me. I apoligize if I messed up. Sieoos (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

​ Hello again. As I mentioned to you already in May, please don't use Wikipedia as your main point of reference for edits here on Wikispecies.

The two wikis are very different, with two very different purposes:

• Wikipedia is a broad, generally kept "all you can eat" encyclopedia with all kinds of information. Wikispecies is not.
• Wikispecies is an online database specifically and exclusively encompassing the taxonomy of biological organisms. Wikipedia is not.

Thus, the two wikis have very different approaches to how they handle and present their information; we complement each other, servicing different types of needs to different types of users. But for this to be meaningful, each wiki must stick to its own respective agenda.

–Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 18:09, 29 December 2024 (UTC).

I understand. Sieoos (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)