Module talk:Taxobox

From a practical perspective I think that this should support P71 (P71): probably not long term, but for now. As it now stands, parent taxon (P171) is not present in all that many items, while P71 (P71) is often present (although not nearly everywhere). Including this will increase the immediate usefulness of the Module. - Brya (talk) 06:07, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

A very minor point: If it gives a reference it does so in the form:

Angiosperm Phylogeny Group: An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III.In: Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society. (161) p.105–121. 2009-10-01 doi:10.1111/j.1095-8339.2009.00996.x

There is a period (full stop) before the volume number ("... Society. (161) ...") which is not how it is commonly done. Also there is no space before "In". Both do bother me. - Brya (talk) 06:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I added the space. However, showing all reference properties defined by Wikidata:Sources perfectly is out of scope of this module. I hope that soon a general module for handling sources is created which the Taxobox module can use then. Of course, as this is a wiki ;-) everyone can extend the module. I for myself plan to focus on the taxonomy part as this is the main aspect of the taxobox we should present to others. I think about adding family - however, I personally think this should be modeled with parent taxon (P171) and we should no longer use P70 (P70), P71 (P71), and friends. If you mix both systems, this is a) not easy to implement and b) might confuse the user if it is no longer clear which property is used for which information: For example, what should be displayed if P171 and P70 are both set, but differ?  — Felix Reimann (talk) 19:14, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that parent taxon (P171) is preferable, but for the moment P71 (P71) is much more often present.

        Would it be possible to set a default reference to be followed (preferably APG III), which of course would be overridden if the user sets a different preference? - Brya (talk) 06:00, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Script error

Barotse Barb (Q143713) causes a script error. --Succu (talk) 16:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. It failed as one parent taxon was deleted. Both problems are fixed: The taxobox should be able now to cope with deleted items and the parent taxon of the Cyprinidae is fixed, too. Please report script errors also in the future. I'm pretty sure that I do not have considered all special cases yet. :-)  — Felix Reimann (talk)

More than one parent taxon

Apocynaceae (Q173756) has two values for parent taxon (P171): Gentianales (Q21754) with five refenences and the outdated Contortae (Q4614869) with a single reference. The taxobox for Oncinotis (Q9052419) shows the outdated value. Why? --Succu (talk) 13:35, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this is fascinating. My guess is that it shows the parent taxon which was added most recently, but this is not always true. My preference would be that it would by default show APG III, unless there is a specific reference listed as preferred (see above). - Brya (talk) 16:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Currently, the only rule is to prefer stated in (P248) based sources in comparison to unsourced or P143-sourced claims. If there are more than one P248-sourced claims, the one to display is chosen arbitrarily. What we could do and what I propose is to use the claim with the most recent sources (based on publication date (P577)). However, this requires (a) to load all source items and (b) will only reduce to number of cases where you want to manually define to source to use.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

That would be an improvement but does not look adequate. For example, APG III and the rank-based alternative were published simultaneously. The best would be to have a default, that is to check for a preference chosen by the user and if there is not one, to use the default. It would be a good idea to pick a default for every group of organisms. It should not be too hard to program (but I doubt if I could do it, I am still trying to understand the exact language used).

        What is quite weird right now is that there may be a different source picked at every rank, producing a total classification that never existed in reality. - Brya (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem A phylogenetic classification of the land plants to accompany APG III (Q13626292) vs. An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classification for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III (Q13683362) - both published in October 2009 - came in to my mind too. But I think Felixs proposel will solve most problematic cases. An interactive taxobox is a task for the future. --Succu (talk) 06:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Can we resolve this issue with the new rank feature by marking all APGIII-references as „prefered rank“? --Succu (talk) 16:58, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I added a proposal here. In short: Yes. This is the way to go. But not yet implemented. :( If you find 2,3 example items, against which I could implement, this could help.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 22:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

It no longer works?

I am no longer seeing a taxobox. What happened? I tried reverting an edit that I did not understand, but that did not help. - Brya (talk) 16:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I think this has something to do with this unanounced breaking change . --Succu (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It is back again. No idea why, but glad to see it. - Brya (talk) 05:25, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Felix fixed it. Thanks. --Succu (talk) 06:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Succu, this was the right hint. It was really the API change which broke it.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 13:04, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Support for incertae sedis (P678)

Yesterday I edited Rhizomorpha (Q14905764), a thankful consumer of incertae sedis (P678). It would be nice to have support for this qualifier in the near future. Then we can get rid of most links to incertae sedis (Q235536) and a lot of constraint violations caused by these links. --Succu (talk) 12:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Bug in autor citation

Autor citation for Matucana polzii (Q1910762) is „Zecher, Donald, Diers“ but schould be „Diers, Donald & Zecher“. (inverse order, & is missing). --Succu (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC) PS: A further example: Opuntia pachyrrhiza (Q147559). --Succu (talk) 07:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 17:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --Succu (talk) 17:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Order of authors of references

The order of authors of references is also still random, see Rhipicephalus (Q2040501). However, this requires to rewrite p.targetId() to store the claims in a list and not in a set and, thus, requires a lot of changes in the code. This would also directly lead to a deterministic selection of the parent taxon (the first one of the list with an appropriate source). -> appended to the TODO list.  — Felix Reimann (talk)

Handling of code of nomenclature (P944)

Some days ago I tagged bacteria (Q10876) with code of nomenclature (P944) = International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (Q743780). That works well for Zymomonas (Q3008835), but not for Zymomonas mobilis (Q245744). The cause is evident. I think the best solution is to extend the lookup path of parent taxon (P171) and not to tag lower ranks too. --Succu (talk) 13:41, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Iterating up the hierarchy till a code is found. I hope my loop detection works...  — Felix Reimann (talk) 18:03, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Script error II

If has basionym (P566) is present but no taxon author is given, than a script error occurs. --Succu (talk) 12:16, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Do you have an example? Would make it easier.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 12:42, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Adansonia gibbosa (Q352291). --Succu (talk) 12:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 17:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Script error III

If I select the next higher rank in Agaricomycetes (Q27720) (it's Agaricomycotina (Q584822)) then a script error occors. --Succu (talk) 12:42, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Created an error while fixing subgenus formatting. Thanks for the reports.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 17:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Parsing the last name of author

In Bouchardina robisoni (Q3933857), the author Horton Holcombe Hobbs, Jr. (Q3140859) is rendered as "Jr", the correct is "Hobbs". - Soulkeeper (talk) 22:32, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The box shows simply the last part of the name. I think it is not really possible to implement all possible naming schemes in the world to find the correct part. Thus, just add author citation (zoology) (P835) in cases where the displayed name does not fit and ICNafp does not apply.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 05:37, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

All is broken

@FelixReimann:. Gadget, module, template... :( Infovarius (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Taxobox Todos

Open Points List, please augment (with examples and how they would be correct) and resort to priorize development:

1. Add rank support (use ranks as major tool to select P171/P225), e.g.: Q1950584 (should be Lampropeltis elapsoides)
2. Improve author name handling for recombinations, e.g.: Q772819 (name should be in brackets)
3. Support for incertae sedis (see Succu's comment)  Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
4. If no image defined, automatically use an image of a child taxon (not yet possible, requires enhanced queries)
5. Support for first valid description (Q1361864) --Succu (talk) 16:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
6. Make use of taxon common name (P1843) as a replacement/addition of the language label. (priority is low) --Succu (talk) 21:48, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
7. Add support for taxonomic type (P427). Be aware of this discussion. --Succu (talk) 20:21, 11 June 2015 (UTC)  Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
8. Add support for original combination (P1403) to show the correct autor citation. --Succu (talk) 09:08, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

... — Felix Reimann (talk) 22:39, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Succu: Thanks for your input! How should first valid description (Q1361864) be supported? Could you give an example, how it should look like?  — Felix Reimann (talk) 12:08, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

You'll find first valid description (Q1361864) as a reference to taxon name (P225) marked as instance of (P31)=first valid description (Q1361864) (eg Secretive dwarf squirrel (Q1769984)). So the simplest solution would be to add this reference to the reference section of our taxobox. --Succu (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I wondered how it should be added in the taxobox itself (similar as basionym or such props which change something in the layout). Adding them to the references should not be a problem. Thanks!  — Felix Reimann (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Succu, please check Secretive dwarf squirrel (Q1769984). Is it ok as it is now?  — Felix Reimann (talk) 08:19, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Looks good. I found an issue in Opuntia (Q158991) (page(s) (P304)= novalue). --Succu (talk) 08:32, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. It was an error in Module:Cite.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 09:25, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

@Succu: Regarding 7.: How should it be supported? Do you have an example that I can see how the result should look like? Thanks for the suggestions!  — Felix Reimann (talk) 21:01, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Simply as a new section as in en:Gondwanasuchus (random example). Holotypes etc. should be added as a reference. I've no idea what exactly this means. We need more usages. BTW: All additional sections like range map or iucn state should be made optional. --Succu (talk) 21:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Ranks are here!

The taxobox now considers ranks. Currently, this means that the selection of specific literature is not working anymore (ranks are considered more important for the selection of the parent taxon). However, this is only temporal, until I add some logic to support also this feature again. However, I found another problem which will be more visible from now on: The taxobox shows as heading the trivial name, i.e., either the scientific name or the label of the taxon if it is different from the scientific name. However, Chelonoidis nigra nigra (Q486672) 'C. nigra' is of course not the trivial name and nonetheless different from 'C. niger', the selected scientific name. Long story short: It is hard to detect automatically, if the label of the item is a scientific or a trivial name. Do we need something like title (P1476) for trivial names?  — Felix Reimann (talk) 20:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

How about the common name, as Succu suggested? - Brya (talk) 05:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

It is perfect. However, I didn't know it till Succu added it above as response to this question. :-)  — Felix Reimann (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

 Info I added more than 3,000 german plant names from FloraWeb (Q20073251) which is the basis for Q1541961. There are a lot of cases where they differ from the german sitelink title and/or label. --Succu (talk) 14:42, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Redundancy

I notice that the lowest rank displayed repeats the name of the taxon (in the Chelonoidis nigra nigra (Q486672) the scientific name is Chelonoidis niger, but the lowest rank displayed is species, and repeats this). This looks silly to me and means that a more useful higher rank, at the top, is not displayed. - Brya (talk) 05:30, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

This is exactly the problem with the trivial name I described above. I can now fix it with the new property.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 20:10, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Support for audio?

I'm working on Taxon items with audio. Can we add audio (P51) as part of this module, perhaps right under the image? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen:: Added. See Black-chinned Hummingbird (Q973463). Maybe you could add additional qualifiers to specify what you will hear. Currently, its only possible to say "arbitrary audio file". Is it possible to cluster them, like for example with a qualifier instance of (P31) "bird song" or something.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 22:39, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I added instance of (P31): bird vocalization (Q1126556) to have an example to play with, but am not sure that's the best way to make the audio statements more useful. Should all frogs get "frog song", whales get "whale song" and so on? There are also things like stridulation (Q610560). Will have to think about it a bit more — suggestions most welcome! --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:02, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Bug in journal citation

In places like Crocuta crocuta (Q178089), the reference contains improper links displayed as [[Q18642816|Zootaxa]]. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:08, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: Fixed. --Philip Tzou (talk) 10:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Abbreviation of zoology authors

@Succu: I need some guidance here. I found Gotthelf Fischer von Waldheim (Q57802) has multiple author abbreviation in zoology, for example Fischer, G. Fischer and even Fischer de Waldheim, 1817. Which name should be used in Taxobox and why? Or should we use some qualifier(s) to specify certain abbreviation per taxon? I want to add the logic to this module. --Philip Tzou (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how usefull author citation (zoology) (P835) is at all. Squirrels of the World (Q19597701) is using von Waldheim as another variant. In Kurixalus berylliniris (Q22348485) you will find two different Wu's. ZooBank cites the name as Kurixalus berylliniris Wu, Huang, Tsai, Lin, Jhang & Wu, 2016. Names of zoological authors are not standardized. But we have a similar case with botanist author abbreviation (P428). Some authors have two abbreviations because they married (Constraint violations). --Succu (talk) 16:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Any progess, Philip Tzou? --Succu (talk) 23:02, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Not yet. I'll find some time this weekend perhaps. --Philip Tzou (talk) 20:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Extinct feature

I added a feature to represent the extinct status. This basically will add a "†" (can be i18n modified) before the extinct taxon's name, and will handle the monotypic properly. See the example of Orycteropus abundulafus (Q7105303)(extinct) versus aardvark (Q46212). --Philip Tzou (talk) 12:42, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

This is a nice feature! Pity it only works if a fossil range has been added to the item. - Brya (talk) 05:55, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

We now have "instance of fossil taxon" implemented; not complete yet, but getting there. - Brya (talk) 16:41, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Maybe around 30,000 usages are worth a second thought? --Succu (talk) 19:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Help using taxobox on Wiki

I've copied the Module:Taxobox to cywiki. I now need to copy templates, I believe, starting with the class Aves, and working down. What template do I use, and is there a way to automate this with my AWB bot?? All 10,000 birds are being matched to WD Qcodes as we speak. I estimate that only a handful of these 10k have corresponding articles on cywiki (maybe 40?), so this is virgin territory - great for a test of a new taxobox etc!

Any help on this project would be appreciated. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:00, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Just a link to some examples would be nice. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Just uploaded the Taxobox modules on cy.wiki, but hit a dead end. Error: error in Modiwl:Cite at line 177: attempt to concatenate local 'journaltitle' (a nil value). Please help! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

As there's been absolutely no help here on getting this to work on cywiki, I'm deleting all references and templates to it on cywiki.

What other option is there? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:10, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

The other option is to create 14,000 templates / pages of species on Wikidata under my usename - one page with an infobox for each species. That would then be taken into the relevant page on cywiki using my AWB bot. The 14,000 pages could then be deleted, if needed. A roundabout way, but I can do it. I can not use Module:Taxobox on cywiki and it seems to be a Lua problem, but they can't spot the problem, this, therefore seems to be the only solution. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 11:51, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Bug?

Why there are no links to order/subphylum in Q18485927? --Infovarius (talk) 16:47, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

My screen does show those links. - Brya (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I checked ru, en and de: there are no links inside the taxobox, only the names. Philip Tzou? --Succu (talk) 17:33, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

The two levels above are "instance of monotypic taxon", so maybe the module regards links as self-links and just gives the names? - Brya (talk) 18:27, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

You understand right, Brya. I see only names instead of 2 upper levels (other are links, they are fine). How to fix that? --Infovarius (talk) 21:52, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Taxon with no name

Over at Bosavi woolly rat (Q3032520) (which is not an officially named taxon yet but has been tagged as an instance of taxon), the module brings up the following message: "Lua error: bad argument #1 to 'gsub' (string expected, got nil).". --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:44, 3 June 2016 (UTC)  Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 22:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Lua error in Module:Taxobox at line 976: attempt to concatenate local 'latin' (a nil value).

That's what I'm seeing on items for some taxa, e.g. Q26262494 and Q26331267. Others work fine, e.g. Q25317. The relevant code passage ending with line 976 is

	local unranked = {}
	for i = 1, params["rank[size]"] do
		local pf = string.format("rank[%d]", i)
		local latin = params[pf .. "[latin]"]
		if latin == "clade" then
			unranked[#unranked + 1] = i
		else
			local txarg = pf .. "[taxon]"
			local atarg = pf .. "[authority]"
			params[txarg] = overrides[latin] or params[txarg]
			params[atarg] = overrides[latin .. "_authority"] or params[atarg]

, and I don't see what's wrong with that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

The „enhancements“ done by User:PhiLiP introduced errors like this. --Succu (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

NOTE: Parentheses

If a species changes rank within the same genus like in Conger marginatus (Q28659432) → Conger cinereus marginatus (Q28659440) parentheses are wrong. --Succu (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Or vice versa of course Craterocephalus stercusmuscarum fulvus (Q13500513) → Craterocephalus fulvus (Q28659542). --Succu (talk) 20:08, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, the zoological Code is not very explicit about details here. It does not define "original combination" (not in the Glossary), let alone the newly hatched "protonym". If "original combination" is viewed as something affecting the author citation, then it should not be used in these cases. There appear to be two solutions:

1. adjust the software so that it only changes the author citation when a taxon is placed in a new genus. This should be the easiest way to go.
2. introduce a new term to use instead of "original combination" for the first time a species-group name is used in a name. This looks more messy, but is possible. - Brya (talk) 04:39, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Rendering of ICZN subgenera

Pzgulyas, the rendering of ICZN subgenera is wrong. See: Prenanthcucullia (Q21439605). Shargacucullia (prenanthcucullia) should be Shargacucullia (Prenanthcucullia). --Succu (talk) 19:39, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Fixed--Pzgulyas (talk) 17:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

†Euphaedusa

The genus Euphaedusa (Q28146788) is not a fossil taxon, but it is rendered as "†Euphaedusa". --Succu (talk) 22:11, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

But its 4th parent Clausilioidea (Q5129545) is. There's a logic programmed into the module if a parent is fossil, all its descendants are treated as fossils too. --Pzgulyas (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Thx. Looks like Fossilworks gives a wrong information. I changed this. --Succu (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

If the requirement of a fossil taxon (Q23038290) cannot be a parent taxon (P171) of a taxon (Q16521) is regarded as a constraint, then there are 12000+ constraint violations in the database, considered only the direct parent-child relationship: SPARQL query. Querying all the violations with "+" just timeouts. :) --Pzgulyas (talk) 08:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks like we imported a lot wrong information from Fossilworks. :( I started to reduce this a little bit. --Succu (talk) 15:48, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Anyway, is there a way to mark a clade as fossil?--Pzgulyas (talk) 13:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Create a new item fossil clade. --Succu (talk) 22:33, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Authorship

Epidendrum undulatum (Q39386110) is the basionym of Trichocentrum undulatum (Q15469168). The taxobox of Epidendrum undulatum (Q39386110) lists Trichocentrum undulatum (Q15469168) as a synonym but the authorship is incomplete, missing the basionym authorship. Correct is Trichocentrum undulatum (Sw.) Ackerman & M.W.Chase (2001) --Succu (talk) 19:33, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done--Pzgulyas (talk) 07:45, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Authorship (ICZN)

If original combination (P1403) is present use the authorship of the linked item ([1], [2]). --Succu (talk) 20:10, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Unknown value throws error

Setting has basionym (P566) to "unknown value" throws error The ID "Qnovalue" is unknown to the system. Please use a valid entity ID. (Example). --Succu (talk) 11:44, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Same is true for original combination (P1403) (Example). --Succu (talk) 13:16, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

And for taxonomic type (P427) e.g. Aquifolium (Q65717873) --Succu (talk) 18:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Same with "novalue" e.g. Balanops (Q131357) --Succu (talk) 19:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Wrong PMC link

On Clostridium difficile (Q310543), the reference A higher level classification of all living organisms (Q19858624) is used and shows a broken link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC?term=4418965 instead of https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4418965 or https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4418965 . I have not found the source of this problem, so reporting it here in the hope that someone knows better. I also find it irritating that basically everything in that reference is linked, except the title, which is in other contexts often the only thing that is linked. What about linking it to Q19858624? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:00, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Formatting of virus names

Please adopt the following rules of International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature (Q14920640):

• 3.30: „In formal taxonomic usage, the accepted names of virus, viroid and satellite realms, subrealms, kingdoms, subkingdoms, phyla, subphyla, classes, subclasses, orders, suborders, families, subfamilies, genera and subgenera are printed in italics and the first letters of the names are capitalized.“
• 3.31: „Species names are printed in italics and have the first letter of the first word capitalized. Other words are not capitalized unless they are proper nouns, or parts of proper nouns.“

--Succu (talk) 18:47, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Make use of nomenclatural status (P1135)

Indicate that a name is a nomen conservandum (Q941227) or nomen rejiciendum (Q17276482) etc. --Succu (talk) 21:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

taxonomic type (P427)

References to type genus (Q842832) and type species (Q252730) should be taken from taxonomic type (P427) and not from taxon name (P225). See e.g Saururaceae (Q157072). --Succu (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Role of taxonomic type (P427)

Visualize the role of taxonomic type (P427) Here it's a lectotype (Q2439719). --Succu (talk) 20:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Italic for subgenera

Hi, the subgenera are not displayed in italics, e.g.:

Andora (Dorana)
Systematics
Clade	Nephrozoa
Infrakingdom	Deuterostomia
Phylum	Echinodermata
Subphylum	Asterozoa
Class	Asteroidea
Superorder	Valvatacea
Order	Valvatida
Family	Ophidiasteridae
Genus	Andora
Subgenus	Andora (Dorana)
Scientific name of subgenus
Andora (Dorana)
Rowe, 1977

Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Test with object has role recombination for the use of parentheses

Hello, following this discussion and my proposal there I made this test, the consequence being that the way "instance if recombination" is now obsolete and don't works anymore. This is just a test and we can of course revert if needed. Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note that I mofified it a bit and both ways works fine now: "instance of recombination" and object has role recombination". Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Lua error

I tested it on Wiki, but i get this error message Lua error in Module:Taxobox at line 22: Tried to write global NOMENCLATURE_ICZN. Can we currently use it on other wiki ? 511KeV (talk) 16:49, 29 March 2022 (UTC)