hello. first thanks for your many changes in commons, especially as you appear to be well aware of the current APG II-system. also, I have followed discussions in the german WP about your changes there: people are uneasy because they don't like to have alternative taxonomy systems in the articles as this is unneeded information. I hope you understand nobody objects to APG II in the german WP, and I'd encourage you to remove any old bagagge that might be there, but what is a bit useless is all this info on old systems - it confuses people who don't know much about botany, and can be readily left out. that's all, and thanks again. -- Ayacop 08:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your kind words. I will agree that it is mostly useless to have much info in categories of commons. However, as I see it the problem is that people will link here from many places with many preconceptions. I fear to use only the APG information, as people may not recognize them. It is rather a "damned if you do and damned if you don't" situation. Following your suggestion, I will try and revise category descriptions, keeping them as short as possible, with links to where it is explained more fully. Brya 09:33, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello my friend,
I have seen you modifications in .
Do I understand that:
- angiosperms, monocots, commelinids should be written with lower case
- Poales, Bromeliaceae in uppercase ? (to follow the old ways ? ;-))
- Hello Orchi,
- Yes, I think that is neat! Brya 07:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Copy of note posted on WikProject Plants about italicization of higher taxa not mentioned in edit summaries
Has it been decided that User:Brya should italicize all higher taxa of plants on Commons as he/she is currently doing? Or is this a non-issue at Commons? I suspect that it has not been agreed upon simply because Brya is going about it in the same way he/she did on en.wiki, namely, hidiing the italicization of higher taxa edits in other edits and not mentioning them in the edit summaries (which says "recat" not (italicize higher taxa"), and because it is mentioned explicitly on the project page that "higher taxa are capitalized but not italicized." If it has been decided to italicize higher taxa, and move to APG II, let me know, and change the project page.
User:Brya has moved on to creating sock accounts on en.wiki to italicize higher taxa and insert jargon-laced taxonomy comments. It appears that Brya is intentioned to do whatsoever he/she wants regardless of community consensus on en.wiki and Commons, though.
This is what this project says:
Article titles and common names The scientific name should be used wherever possible. Even if there are generally accepted english names, remember that this is an international project. Note that
- Names of genera are always italicized and capitalized: Butia, Rosa, Santalum.
- en:Species epithets are always italicized and preceded by the name of the genus Magnolia virginiana (the shorthand M. virginiana should preferably be avoided), and never plain virginiana, since such identifiers need not be unique. They are never capitalized.
- Names of higher taxa are capitalized but not italicized: Fagaceae, Rosales, Plantae.
So, has the practice of italicizing higher taxa been changed on Wikipedia Commons, to a style of italicizing them, or is is the style as stated on the WikiProject Plants page, namely, that the higher taxa should not be italicized, and Brya should not be italicizing them within his/her other edits?
KP Botany 04:03, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- PS Read first. I realize now, that I should have checked if Brya was doing this on other pages, as I was just checking the Asparagales for something else. This may simply have been an editing slip on Brya's part from managing the various sock accounts on en.wiki--in other words, he/she may not be doing this on Commons routinely, but may have simply done this one in between going back and forth on the various sock puppet accounts he/she is using to edit en.wiki, but it should be checked if this is the case. KP Botany 04:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)