Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/Variability in Polititapes aureus

Variability in Polititapes aureus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2022 at 06:29:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

• 
  Polititapes aureus
  Right valve
• 
  Polititapes aureus
  Left valve
• 
  Polititapes aureus var. beudanti
  Right valve
• 
  Polititapes aureus var. beudanti
  Left valve
• 
  Polititapes aureus var. mabillei
  Right valve
• 
  Polititapes aureus var. mabillei
  Left valve

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family: Veneridae
•  Info Polititapes aureus is characterized by a color pattern on the shell consisting of brown lines, spots and rays. The inner surface of the shell is more or less yellow (golden = Latin: aureus). The variation "beudanti" differs by the partially violet coloring of the inside. The "mabillei" variation has a predominantly whitish shell, only the lunula and the back side are colored brown; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support -- Llez (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support--Lmbuga (talk) 12:17, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451071 14:30, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not a valid set according to the rules, because it does not "show all possible variations". This page seems to indicate there are more variations for this species, and our guidelines are clear: "Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats". We are in this case in my opinion. They are Valued Images, but not FP -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment Sorry, but your link leads to a list of synonyms (!), NOT varieties. Synonyms are quite different from varieties, they are the names by which a species has been described by differernt authors, regardless of shape or color. Several synonyms can include identical forms or varieties, they are not morphologically differentiated, unlike varieties! --Llez (talk) 05:20, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

• The page contains 65 times the word "variété" (variety, in French) and says twelve forms belong to the subgenus Polititapes ("douze formes appartiennent au sous-genre Polititapes").

How many varieties are presented in your set, two? Beudanti and mabillei, so why 3x2 pictures? And where is it written that these two varieties are the only 2 possible? (cf guidelines "unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that)". -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:09, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

 Comment The text you cited above and you linked to was published in 1939! This more than 80 years old work corresponds in no way to the current state of research. The taxonomy, the species concept and the definition of varieties is completely different today than it was then. BTW "twelve forms belong to the subgenus Polititapes" you say, but this set shows not Polititapes (the whole genus) but only the species Polititapes aureus! --Llez (talk) 06:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

• The page does not talk (only) about "synonyms", that's what I meant with this quote. By the way, almost all the synonyms mentioned in the Wikipedia page are unaccepted. Moreover, the question of the diversity, concerning the varieties, remains. Would a set nomination of 50 races (like varieties) of dogs be acceptable here? 🤔 No. Thus, it is the same here, in my opinion. Imagine a set showing a picture of dog captioned "Dog", and then two pictures called "Dog Labrador Retriever" and "Dog Poodle". Weird, right? -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:05, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia refers to WoRMS, and WoRMS only works at the species level. "Acceptet" in WoRMS and Wikipedia means that it is an accepted species. Approved subspecies and varieties are therefore always listed with "not accepted" (as species!), but it does not mean, they are not accepted as subspecies or variety. --Llez (talk) 08:48, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

• We agree the two "var." of your set, mabillei and beudanti, are not valid species, right? And they certainly don't form a whole group. Thus, your set is not valid according to our guidelines (see COM:FPC).

Please have a look at this set nomination. My comment may "speak" to you 😆

The major problem here is the potential diversity of "varieties" / races. Like dogs or cats -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:29, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

•  Support Subject to the above comment. I can't judge that.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:12, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Synonyms are a completely different thing than varieties. A link to a recent publication that gives the list of accepted varieties would be welcome here, though it's maybe not easy as all publications are not freely available. But well OK I trust Llez. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 06:22, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful and educative. --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose I know nothing of shells, but a common-sense Google (e.g. this web page seems to show that there are many variations of this species which are not included in this nomination. Ivar will have a view on this topic. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Llez: please provide a link, where we can see all accepted varietes of Polititapes aureus. I couldn't find any. --Ivar (talk) 16:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others wrt being a set. Also I don't think the quality is great here compared to other shells. We have often 80MP of mostly black and when you examine each shell, many are out of focus for most of their area, and none appear to have pixel-level sharpness. In other words, I think this is at most 20MP or less, of resolution. -- Colin (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose per Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment As there ist a huge variability and no shell looks like another you have a lot of transitions between the varieties and ist is often not easy to separate them. Therefore there is no consensus of the different authors about the number and the differention of the forms and varieties. I choose the three forms of the species which can easy be distinguished by a single clear character and with no doubt. But I think it is better  I withdraw my nomination. --Llez (talk) 03:58, 4 April 2022 (UTC)