Template talk:Taxobox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Template talk:Taxobox/doc)
Jump to: navigation, search
          This template is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Tree of Life (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Microformats
Taxobox is part of, or of interest to, WikiProject Microformats, which encourages the deployment of microformats in Wikipedia, and documents them in the article space. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
 

Cacopinae and others[edit]

The template: {{Taxonomy/Cacopinae}} is deprecated, and yet a few other taxonomy templates transclude it. [1]I have no idea where to fix this, since the toolserver link [2] doesn't work.

Invasive[edit]

For the "conservation status" what about allowing the option to tag a species as invasive? I was thinking that this would be worth mentioning, among many others, on cat. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

There is no widely agreed upon definition of "invasive" (as you can see from the lead of the article). Plus, what would be the context for marking a taxon as invasive? Kudzu is invasive in the US, but native in eastern Asia. And if kudzu is invasive, does that mean that its genus Pueraria is also invasive? Kaldari (talk) 02:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, everything is native somewhere, so it's meaningless to say it's not invasive because it's native somewhere. And invasive would be by species like endangered usually is. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:02, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I do not support an invasive species tag in the taxobox. Wikipedia is international in scope, not a guide to "Species of Country X". Furthermore, invasive status is not a property of any species but rather of populations of species in certain regions. Smilarly, we use international or national conservation statuses (e.g. IUCN or ESA status) rather than state or provincial listings because a species could be globally common but locally endangered). The unbiased, globally neutral options would be to either all invasive ranges (countries? states? counties??) in a taxobox, which would be excessive, pedantic, and silly, or to simply omit the info from the taxobox. Invasive status does not belong in a taxobox but could and should be discussed in the body of the article. --Animalparty-- (talk) 03:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
There technically is no such thing as an invasive species. A species can be invasive under certain conditions (even in it's native range), but there is nothing that inherently makes a whole species invasive. A similar equivalent would be incorrectly calling a species as a whole a weed. Kingofaces43 (talk) 01:30, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Guidelines for writing taxonomic sections in articles with a taxobox?[edit]

I've never really looked into Wikipedia guidelines for species articles, but could someone point me to where they might be? This set of edits (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_bean_aphid&diff=625148719&oldid=625141779) piqued my interest. One user claims that information in the taxobox should also be written as prose in the article as well. This seems awfully redundant in addition to seeming like too much information about the various taxonomic levels for a species article anyways. I'm just wondering if there is a good set of guidelines written somewhere that I could lead the user to and also keep as future reference when dealing with insect taxonomy related info. Kingofaces43 (talk) 01:41, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

At first glance, I'd say the the information that was removed is a bit much for an article on a species and may be redundant to the articles on higher taxa, but it did provide some context and info on morphology with a citation, so I'd probably let it stay. Very little of the info was redundant to the taxobox. Do remember that infoboxes are meant to summarize relevant text, not replace it. In biography articles, we still include birth and death dates and locations, alma mater, etc. even though this is also provided in the text. That's not to say that everything in the infobox needs to be reiterated in the text; we don't normally repeat the entire classification up to kingdom as it's understood linking to the next highest taxon will normally take care of that (", a species in the genus ..."). For plants, you can turn to Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Template#Taxonomy as a starting point for a guide on taxonomy sections. I imagine the advice may be similar for other taxa, but I'm not sure where to point you for taxa that don't have chloroplasts... Rkitko (talk) 02:54, 12 September 2014 (UTC)


By way of example, here are two articles with comprehensive taxonomy sections that reached Featured Article status: Rainbow trout and Cutthroat trout. --Mike Cline (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
And a couple of plant examples: Ailanthus altissima and Aiphanes. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
FYI there are some general guidelines at the Infobox Manual of Style, as the Taxobox is a special sort of Infobox. In my view, the taxobox should be as concise and easy to navigate as common sense dictates, and certainly not every inclusive taxon need mention in text (e.g. stating a Zebra is a mammal obviates the need to also call it an animal and a eukaryote and to discuss the defining traits of each).--Animalparty-- (talk) 02:26, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Dates[edit]

I keep coming accross instances of this template with, for example, |binomial_authority=(Linnaeus, 1758). This is harmful, and such values should be entered into two separate parameters, with the year in |binomial_date=, for improved data granularity. However, contrary to the template's documentation, this appears not to work. Have I misunderstood something, or is there a bug? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't see how it would work as two parameters, because of the parentheses. Some zoological authorities need to be "NAME, DATE", some "(NAME, DATE)" or even "(NAME1, DATE1) NAME2, DATE2" (the last is allowed by the ICodeZN, although the transferrer is usually omitted in zoology). Also there are well over 100 "RANK_authority" parameters in the template, not just the one you mentioned. Every one would need several more parameters to make the approach you suggest work. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
I disagree that the inclusion of date with authority is harmful. Possibly a slight inconvence to certain bots or data retrieval systems, bu , as the saying goes, if it aint broke, don't fix it. --Animalparty-- (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Taxobox caption glitch- left alignment[edit]

Possibly due to this change by @Peter coxhead:, many (most?) taxobox image captions seem to have been automatically shifted to left alignment (see for instance Garter snake or Rose or Crocodilia, although Reptile appears to still be centered). This issue, while not crucial, should be addressed ASAP to ensure stylistic congruity and aesthetics, i.e. captions should be centered by default unless explicitly coded for alternate alignment. --Animalparty-- (talk) 19:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Fixed – apologies, my error (not enough testing). (You may need to reload/purge the page to see the change.) Peter coxhead (talk) 19:32, 30 September 2014 (UTC)