User talk:Ucucha/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hi Ucucha, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

  • RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.
  • Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.
  • Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.
  • Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.
  • Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 13:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Hi Ucucha, It's a pleasure to have you around the rodent pages at English wikipedia. I've noticed the Dutch rodents are very up to date. I enjoyed perusing your personal page, particularly your rodent excel files. That must have taken an immense amount of time to compile and is quite the resource. I was having some difficulty deciphering your references. Are the murine tribes your own work? It looks as if you might be citing Duff and Lawson (2004) for that, but they didn't get more specific than subfamily. Regardless, welcome. Please edit to your heart's content, there are certainly plenty of muroids and other rodents to go around. --Aranae 01:05, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

It's most my own work, although the arvicanthines and malacomyines (usually called the Praomys complex) are probably really monophyletic, like the hydromyines, phloeomyines, Murini, micromyines (but those possibly not) and apodemurines. Rattines and echiothrichines are certainly not, and conilurines possibly also.
It won't be long before someone finally gets around to publishing a tribal level relations. Yours is a very interesting hypothesis and I'd bet much of it turns out to be valid. I'd seen the African stuff. I think the stuff from SE Asian islands and Australasia might turn out to be pretty key to the story of the evolution of the whole group. Steppan et al. (2004) showed Batomys to be basal to all other murines including a Chrotomys, Rhynchomys, and Apomys. Jansa and Weksler (2004) showed Phloeomys basal to everything else including Rhynchomys again. Unfortunately there just isn't enough overlap in taxa and so few taxa included that it's hard to interpret the data. It sure suggests a basal position for clade from that area. Thanks again for making that available. --Aranae 06:33, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
The Batomys-Phloeomys group (suggested in the 1993 MSW, I thought) might prove to be related to the Australasian hydromyines, I think. They are both primitive and so on. I'll remove the New Endemics from the Echiothrichini once again, which may make both Rattini and Echiothrichini monophyletic (although that might not really be the case).
I've been wondering why Australasian murines have never been included in such analyses. My personal impression is that DNA or karyotype is known for not a single New Guinean or Australian murine. Ucucha 14:00, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
A 400 bp fragment of cytochrome b has been sequenced from Notomys and Pseudomys. To my knowledge that's it. --Aranae 18:12, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
Some cyt b from Hydromys chrysogaster might be more useful-it might resolve the placement of the tribe. Do you also know why only such small DNA fragments are known from the Australasian murines? Ucucha 18:51, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
These sequences are specimen vouchers and species confirmation. As to why it hasn't been studied in better detail, I suspect it's just luck. The Americans, Europeans, Japanese, etc. probably don't have the tissue and the Australian molecular systematists have been looking at marsupials. --Aranae 19:27, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
Sounds likely. It's a pity, I think. However, I was wondering if you are a professional scientist. You seem to know pretty much about rodents. Ucucha 19:36, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I cite Duff & Lawson only for the species, which get a "x" when they mentioned it, and otherwise I make some comments why I consider the species valid.

Thank you very much that you liked my lists. I started with taking some animals from old books, followed by copies from a checklist of mammals in an encyclopedia and Walker's Mammals of the World (it was still online then). Thereafter, I started to insert authors, type localities and "sp" en "HT" things. Ucucha 05:05, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Delicate Slender Opossum[edit]

Transferred to Talk:Delicate Slender Opossum. Ucucha See Mammal Taxonomy 15:12, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

eerste ontmoeting[edit]

ik zou iedereen graag willen uitnodigen te overwegen of zij een rol willen en/of kunnen spelen in de oprichting van een nederlandse wikimedia-organisatie. een eerste ontmoeting wordt momenteel georganiseerd, zie daarvoor hier, op de wiki. er zijn nog vele stappen te nemen, en meer wikianen nodig, om e.e.a. op verantwoorde wijze verder te ontwikkelen. Radiant_>|< 10:50, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Authority bot[edit]

See User:Gdr/ Let me know how you get on. Gdr 22:45:06, 2005-08-08 (UTC)

Thanks re necromys[edit]

Many thanks for the correction. I am reasonably confident that about what I do inside Cetacea though I can't help poking my nose inside elsewhere in Mammalia even though I only have generalist resources (McKennaBell 97, Duff Lawson which I agree is a direct lift from McKenna/Bell with species added, MacDonald's extremely pretty book). When I am filling out red links, do you have a prefered website/book that I should refer to for Rodentia/anywhere else? Pcb21| Pete 22:33, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

MSW 3rd edition, which will appear in November or so, but it will already be out-of-date when published. I fear I have to be egoistic and say that my own site, Mammal Taxonomy, is the best. It's not perfect, but I don't have a better source :-(. Others include the site, which is also generally up-to-date,, which is mostly out of date, and a few Internet lists, which are generally very out of date. You can ask me for help when you aren't sure. Ucucha|... 05:46, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Pcb21| Pete 10:36, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Your site looks awesome, but unfortunately the zip file containing the data seems to be corrupted? I have downloaded it twice with two different browsers but each time I can't an "archive is corrupted" message. To save your website being hammered, perhaps you could send the excel files to me via the email this user function? Pcb21| Pete 11:28, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
Oh no... again :-(. I can't attach files using the "e-mail this user" button. Please send me a short note, in order to give me your address, then I can attach the files. Ucucha|... 11:33, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
I've sent you a mail. Pcb21| Pete 11:42, 14 August 2005 (UTC)


Any one interested in updating the mammal articles to conform with MSW 3, please join the discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals#Mammal_Species_of_the_World.2C_3rd_ed. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Calomyscus bailwardi in Syria[edit]

I noticed on the nl page for Calomyscus you listed C. bailwardi as living in Syria. Are you familiar with any Syrian Calomyscus records beyond Peshev's original collections of C. tsolovi? These animals have also been called "C. bailwardi" or "C. bailwardi tsolovi" by him and other authors, but are all in reference to C. tsolovi. This genus is tough at times, because many researchers outside of Russia still seem to refer to everything in it as C. bailwardi. --Aranae 00:50, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

It was in error. I read the MSW 2 comments for Calomyscus: "The population from Syria was discovered only recently", but I erroneously listed it for C. bailwardi. I'll change it.
Thanks for your help! Ucucha|... 13:17, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
I was hoping there was something cool and new about this group. I'm convinced Calomyscus is also found in parts of Iraq, Tajikistan, and other countries in that area (perhaps Eastern Turkey?). The area just hasn't been sampled enough. I wouldn't have been surprised if a large bailwardi-like new form was found in a different part of Syria. --Aranae 23:08, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
It seems likely that they have a continuous distribution, yes. But I don't know of any new information about them. Maybe in MSW 3. By the way, did you know nl:Gebruiker:Ucucha/Nieuw/2005 already? I wrote articles about all new mammals described this year. Craseonycteris has been recorded from Myanmar, too. There remains much to be learned about mammals :-). Ucucha|... 13:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

species/subspecies discussion[edit]

You might be interested in the short discussion on talk:Forest Elephant. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:10, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I've answered. Ucucha|... 14:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Primates category rework[edit]

After some good discussion on the talk for WP:PRIM with User:Marskell, I've begun work on cleaning up category:Early hominids. Please come to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Primates/category rework to weigh in your opinion on what direction to take. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:11, 15 September 2005 (UTC)


Please excuse the intrusion, but I noticed that you opposed the creation of the Wikiversity project - would you mind sharing the reasons why? Ambi 10:43, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Because I don't like the creation of too many new projects. This should be incorporated in Wikibooks. Ucucha|... 12:13, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

primate hybrids and gibbons[edit]

An anonymous user has added a new section to the Primate article: Primate#Primate hybrids. Can you verify any of this section? Also, a wonderful new user, user:Estelahe has added some new information on gibbon classification. Please see her note on my talk page - UtherSRG (talk) 11:53, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Some of this seems very improbable to me, for example rhesus monkey-baboon hybrids, but I can't say anything for sure; it's just my impression.
The gibbon stuff seems good. Here's a wonderful PDF about the Vietnam gibbons: . Ucucha|... 12:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

FishBase cooperation[edit]

An interesting idea! I've tended to view WP as a sort of "frontend" to FishBase, which is structured so that its information is more authoritative, but it lacks context and explanation. It would be especially cool if FishBase encouraged its contributors to license pics for Commons use, which will make them more visible to a wider audience. I'm not sure what exactly we can do, but count me in anyway. User:Hadal might be interested too. Stan 04:40, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

It might be possible to make articles directly from the FishBase database. nl:User:Rex is in fact doing this already, see for example nl:Stompsnuitzeskieuwshaai. Hopefully we'll once become the most authoritative source in the world :-). I'll ask them about the pics. I'll ask Hadal too. Ucucha|... 13:01, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm very much interested! I've been away for about a month, so I apologise for the delayed reply; I do plan to resume editing regularly from this point onward. I echo Stan's desire for Commons-licensed images, as I believe that's where FishBase could help us the most. Bot-generated articles are intriguing, but like Stan, I think we should aim to make our articles useful for layman readers as well. See for example kissing gourami, where I combined data from FishBase and an authoritative aquarist's atlas. The result makes our entry even better than FishBase's, IMO, from an end-user perspective. The only thing missing is an image of the wild form coloration, which FishBase does have.
I've also noticed that wordings of FishBase's family and order summaries are very close to those in Nelson's Fishes of the World (I own a copy). For that reason, I wonder if there are any unforseen legal obstacles if we went the machine-generated route. Compiling the articles by hand, and working in data from diverse sources, would of course negate any such legal worry. That said, I'm extremely interested in FishBase's cooperation, and anything they're prepared to provide. Thanks for contacting me, and please keep me apprised. Cheers, -- Hadal 03:03, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
I always assumed that Nelson just gave them permission for the use of his text (and the drawings too). Stan 05:04, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
I assumed likewise; I didn't mean to imply FishBase itself was breaking copyright. But Nelson's permission to FishBase doesn't give the latter freedom to further distribute his text and images to us (and under the GFDL, which allows commercial use). However, I say this without knowing how the article-generating bot will operate, so I could be tilting at windmills. I don't want to be a killjoy, really. :) -- Hadal 18:26, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Caenolestes condorensis[edit]

The reason I wrote that is that I could not find any references to Caenolestes condorensis in any of the usual sources:

Most of these sites stay pretty up to date, so I assumed the reason it wasn't listed is that there wasn't yet enough data to establish its status as a distict species. Perhaps this was an erroneous conjecture though. The only site I was able to find it listed on was InfoNatura. Do you think I should remove or change the sentence? Kaldari 15:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I think you should. The 1st link you give is the 1993 version of Mammal Species of the World (the new version will appear in November), so it's logical that condorensis is not yet included. The others aren't always up-to-date too, I think. Probably, most new mammals listed in the subpages of nl:Gebruiker:Ucucha/Nieuw are not listed there. Ucucha (talk) 15:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Greetings from the United Federation of Planets[edit]

{{User:Cool Cat/Wikipediholic|483}} You may find the folowing template of interest :) --Cool CatTalk|@ 02:44, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you ;-). It's great :-). Ucucha (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Blue flowers 1.jpg

Hi Ucucha,

Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! If I can ever help with anything or if you have any comments about my actions as an admin, please let me know! Regards, JoanneB 14:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:Human Evolution[edit]

I agree that it's ugly. Perhaps it should be transformed into a bottom box instead of a sidebar? - UtherSRG (talk) 17:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, see Template talk:Human Evolution ;-). Ucucha (talk) 17:01, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
Done. :) - UtherSRG (talk) 18:27, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Heel erg bedankt[edit]

Hi, I want to thank you for your support for my RfA, which was successful. I'm looking forward to contributing as an admin now. Please don't hesitate to let me know if you ever need my help or if you have a problem with any action I make as an admin. I've forgotten a lot of my Dutch, but – ontzettend bedankt, en tot ziens! AnnH (talk) 21:07, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Geen dank :-). Ucucha (talk) 05:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

re: broken userpage[edit]

Nah...I think the problem is your monitor's resolution. :-) That said, I moved one of my templates a bit, so hopefully it'll look somewhat better now for you. Lemme know. Tomertalk 17:33, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Endangered black rats[edit]

Hi Ucucha,

I'm in the midst of a debate with an anonymous editor at Talk:Rat. S/he claims that Rattus rattus is listed as endangered in some parts of Europe. The citation listed is in German and I'm at a loss to understand it. Would you mind adding your thoughts? I'm sure your German is better than mine. --Aranae 21:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Alhutch's RfA[edit]

Dear Ucucha,

I'm an administrator, and I've got you to thank for it! Thanks to your support, my RfA passed 25/0. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can help you with anything. See you around the wiki, :-) Alhutch 05:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza elections[edit]

Hi Ucucha/Archive1: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005.

Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December and all Esperanza members are encouraged to join in.

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please contact Flcelloguy. Thank you.

REDVERS 10:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No interwiki for nl Rodentia page[edit]


I was updating rodent interwikis and discovered that none exist at the Dutch Rodentia page. I decided to not be bold and steer clear since I can't read anything on the associated talk pages and there may have been a reason for it.

I love the {{Knaagdieren}} and similar tables. I'm curious if there's a reason why English wiki hasn't incorporated more of these sorts of tables. --Aranae 08:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

The reason was that <gallery> was closed with <gallery> instead of </gallery>. Thanks for the info; I fixed it.
For the tables I'd say be bold ;-). I've made many of them since; see also nl:Categorie:Navigatiesjabloon voor dieren. Ucucha (talk) 14:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

News from Esperanza[edit]

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

False potto[edit]

Thanks for the false potto link. It was very useful in writing the article. Perodicticus 10:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

An Esperanzial note[edit]

As I remember, the last spam that was handed out was on the 20th of December last year, so I think it's time for another update. First and foremost, the new Advisory Council and Administrator General have been elected. They consist of myself as Admin General and FireFox, Titoxd, Flcelloguy and Karmafist as the Advisory Council. We as a group met formally for the first time on the 31st of Decembe. The minutes of this meeting can be found at WP:ESP/ACM. The next one is planned for tonight (Sunday 29 January) at 20:30 UTC and the agenda can be found at WP:ESP/ACM2.

In other news, Karmafist has set up a discussion about a new personal attack policy, which it can be found here. Other new pages include an introductory page on what to do when you sign up, So you've joined Esperanza... and a welcome template: {{EA-welcome}} (courtesy of Bratsche). Some of our old hands may like to make sure they do everything on the list as well ;) Additionally, the userpage award program proposal has become official is operational: see Wikipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award to nominate a userpage or volunteer as a judge. Also see the proposed programs page for many new proposals and old ones that need more discussion ;)

Other than that, I hope you all had a lovely Christmas and wish you an Esperanzially good new WikiYear :D Thank you! --Celestianpower háblame 16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Message delivered by Rune.welsh using AWB. If you wish to recieve no further messages of this ilk, please sign your name here.

Another Esperanzial note...[edit]

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Celestianpower háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

Use of "also" in English[edit]

It has often been said that English is a confusing language to learn. It is no wonder with our homonyms (too, to, two) and homographs (desert - meaning to abandon - or desert - meaning the place). Add to this complexity our speaking in one way and being expected to write in another. Thus when speaking we often use what is known as a split infinitive:

"To boldly go where no one has gone before."

"She is also known by her nickname, Katie."

In the above examples, the verb is split by an adverb and is grammatically incorrect. In more formal writing, especially scholarly journals, split infinitives are not used and the grammatically correct form is used:

"To go boldy where no one has gone before."

"She also is known by her nickname, Katie."

How ever hard fast this rule or any rule is (another complaint regarding the English language), it is becoming more accepted to use split infinitives in writing. FeralAkodon 14:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really sure, but I believe your first sentence is impossible (?) in English, but your second one is standard. The adjective "also" is placed before all verbs, except for to be and auxiliary verbs (if I remembered correctly). But I'm also not a native speaker and maybe I'm wrong. Ucucha (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


Ucucha - I found the citation for Soule, 1966. See Yeti talk.FeralAkodon 15:34, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

MSW 3[edit]

I was wondering who would knock on my door about my marsupial edits. As our resident mammal expert, I expected it might be you.

I know MSW3 is somewhat out of date, but it's more recent than the articles, so the updates I'm making are at least a start. I plan to go through volume 1 (all but the rodents! Sheesh! There are a lot of rodents!). If you can find me more recent papers, I'll add the post-MSW3 info as well, or you can Wikipedia:be bold and follow after my cleanups. I've already completed Didelphimorphia, Paucituberculata, Microbiotheria, and Dasyuromorphia. I'm currently updating Peramelemorphia. Should we call Australidelphia a magnorder (with Syndactyla as a superorder containing Peramelemorphia and Diprotodontia) or just a superorder?

As for following too strictly, again, MSW3 is just a good place to start from in updating our articles. I won't throw fits if folks want something a little more relaxed, as long as the relaxation following something more recent than MSW3, and not older info.

Oh yes... Planigalinae needs to be split apart... There's good info in the article I don't want to lose, so I've not completed the split yet. I don't know enough about marsupials to be able to do justice to the two articles it would be split into. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, bandicoot seems to a quite fluid term, and perhaps should not be used as a category, and the article should be expanded to include all of the bandicoot species. Every peramelemorph family contains at least one bandicoot species; two genera are of species not called bandicoots in MSW3, but perhaps echymiperas are also called bandicoots? If so, then only the Thylacomyidae are the only non-bandicoots in the order. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing new in the Paucituberculata and Microbiotheria (except for a range extension of Caenolestes). I've just updated Didelphimorphia. No new info for Dasyuromorphia either. There's a new species of Microperoryctes, M. aplini, and M. ornata is now a distinct species. There's a new cuscus (Spilocuscus wilsoni), but maybe that was already included in MSW 3. For the remainder of marsupials and monotremes MSW 3 is up-to-date I believe. Bats are a taxonomic morass, if you want it I'll try to sort the new information (there are some more new species I believe, as well as the first two new genera for more than twenty years (Xeronycteris and Mirimiri). Carnivora and Artiodactyla is as far as I know up-to-date (except for some new antelopes of Cotterill). Note that I haven't seen the whole MSW yet; I've only some proofs. I'll buy the whole book as soon as possible.
There are also studies depicting Peramelemorphia as the sister group of all marsupials and Didelphimorphia seems to be consequently paraphyletic... I wouldn't include any above-order taxa in Marsupialia. This could be discussed in the text.
You might just retain the article about Planigalinae as an "outdated taxon" (something like Ungulata).
The order is mostly called "bandicoots and bilbies" I believe. Echymipera is also a bandicoot I think. They're sometimes also called bandicoots. I think "bandicoot" can easily be used for all Peramelemorphia, even Yarala. Ucucha (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh! You should get it! :) I received mine late last week, hence my recent flurry of activity. It's in two volumes, rodents in volume 2, everything else in volume 1... and volume 2 is about twice the size of volume 1! It's no wonder some folks think the rodents will take over the world. ;)

I know there's nothing new in Paucituberculata and Microbiotheria... but I've reviewed the articles and MSW3 to make sure. :) Ah, that reminds me, perhaps we can tag the articles as we update them in some way, so that folks who come after know they have been updated. Some kind of template that puts in a comment with some additional information - update source and source's date (so 2003-2005 for MSW3, more recent for newer materials). Another good template would be {{MSW3}} to use in refence sections.

Dasyuromorphia I updated for common names. MSW3 is following on a previous work from 2000 and can be considered as much as an official source for common (English language) names as anything can. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:53, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

And it seems you haven't updated your website info in some time, according to the date on the bottom of the page.... - UtherSRG (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I always forget it :(. 1 March will be the next update.
I know rodents is huge. I have a proof for Muroidea, and it's very, very big. Very detailed often, too.
I think it's good if we follow MSW 3 for common names as much as possible. It's good to have one source, to prevent arguments about them. But have a look at muroid common names; Musser & Carleton want to change about all of them I believe. Ucucha (talk) 17:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you have common names for M. aplini and M. ornata? - UtherSRG (talk) 17:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest to call aplini the Arfak Pygmy Bandicoot (it's the smallest bandicoot and it's from the Arfak Mountains) and make ornata the Eastern Striped Bandicoot and change longicauda into the Western Striped Bandicoot. Ucucha (talk) 18:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
How about the new cuscus? It's not in MSW3. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok. With the exception of Diprotodontia (which will have to wait until I'm home and have my book in front of me) I'm done cleaning up the marsupial orders. I still need to make reference & update tags, but that shouldn't take but a few minutes and I'll also do that at home. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I would argue that there is enough support for Australidelphia: (Madsen et al. 2003. Nuclear gene sequences provide evidence for the monophyly of australidelphian marsupials. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 28: 186-196; Asher et al. 2004. First combined cladistic analysis of marsupial mammal interrelationships. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 33: 240-250; Phillips et al. 2001. Mitochondrial genomes of a bandicoot and a brushtail possum confirm the monophyly of australidelphian marsupials. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lon. B, 268: 1533-1538). Ameridelphia, however, is much more controversial with some studies suggesting that Paucituberculata may be more related to the Australidelphia than to Didelphimorphia. MSW3 doesn't deal with superordinal taxa, which leaves the highly controversial McKenna and Bell (1997) as the default of sorts, which in my mind has been superceded by Luo et al. (2002) for the really higher level stuff (cohort/infraclass +). The fact that McK and B and the molecular folks agree on Australidelphia seems like it's at least approaching consensus for acceptance. --Aranae 23:33, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm torn. If Paucituberculata is closer to Australidelphia than to Didelphimorphia, that certainly renders Ameridelphia kaput. But it doesn't exactly say that Australidelphia is good. Are any of the australimorph orders more closely related to Paucituberculata than to the other australimorphs? If so, then that could throw the whole mess into the toilet. However, there are more likely other options: add Pauc to Austral, or raise both Pauc and Didel to superordinal level (or magnordinal, if you have superorder Syndactyla = Peramelemorphia + Diprotodontia. Lots of possibilities, lots of questions. Until something is "finalized", we should either keep the Ameri/Australi split, or get rid of both of them. But let's not us few decide... let's tae this to a larger audience. WP:MAM, perhaps? Talk:Marsupial? - UtherSRG (talk) 02:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Paucituberculata is turning up basal to a monophyletic Australidelphia in some phylogenies. Australidelphia was valid in all of the above studies. --Aranae 03:24, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

They suggest to call S. wilsoni the Blue-eyed Spotted Cuscus (it has blue eyes). You can also call it Wilson's Spotted Cuscus or the Biak Spotted Cuscus (island where it occurs).

I'd suggest to get rid of all taxa between infraclass (or whatever you call Marsupialia) and order. The different phylogenies are certainly not in agreement with each other (I'm sure I've seen the Peramelemorphia basal to Marsupialia in some phylogenies), and it's a matter that could be easily discussed in the body of the articles. Ucucha (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Common names[edit]

There's a discussion on MSW3 and common names on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:05, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. No need to give my opinion there I think ;-). By the way, I am just uploading my new Mammal Taxonomy file ( I'll update the website when that's ready. Ucucha (talk) 14:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you should weigh in anyway. Or at least keep your eye on the discussion. Oh dear... and I'd *just* downloaded! :) - UtherSRG (talk) 14:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

That's probably the reason the site was down ;-). I'll keep an eye on it, at least. Ucucha (talk) 14:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)