Disputatio:Lupus

Canis lupus[fontem recensere]

I know that many disagree with me as far as binomial scientific names are concerned, but come on, surely "wolf," the Romanest of animals doesn't need to be s.v. Canis lupus?! --Iustinus 02:10, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what is your position on binonomial names in general? Personally, if there is no ambiguity, I prefer simple names over compounds, esp. if the simple name is a classical one. --Fabullus 17:39, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I generally agree. Scientific names are best when there's an issue with the common name, e.g. it is unclear to what species the ancient name refers (e.g. halicacabum), there is no universally agreed upon common name (e.g. Solanum tuberosum), and so on. Otherwise I prefer the common name. --Iustinus 17:50, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that too. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:56, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think I improved it.--Rafaelgarcia 04:18, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but it's still ridiculous to cover "wolf" under Canis lupus. Not only is this ridiculously formal, but C. lupus covers both "wolf" and "dog"! The article should, in my opinion, be moved back to Lupus, where i was originally. --Iustinus 06:09, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why Hendricus moved it, really. He was sometimes a bit hasty. I'll move it back. And, given what you say, "Canis lupus" has to be a discretiva, surely. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:59, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Canis lupus has to have its own article, surely, as do Canis and Lupus. Each of those terms is a unique idea. Similarly, there should be an article for each higher level in the family tree: Canidae, Caniformia, Carnivores, Mammalia, Chordata, Animalia. IacobusAmor 14:21, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with your contention that EVERY species should have a separate article for the binomial and the common name, nevertheless that disposition is absolutely reasonable for cases like this one. On the other hand, checking how en: handles this, I see to my surprise that en:Canis lupus is a redirect to en:Gray Wolf. en:Dog is listed as a subspecies, C. lupus domesticus, for what that's worth. --Iustinus 17:03, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article Canis lupus will naturally discuss the traits that canis and lupus have in common, whereas the article Canis will restrict itself to canis and the article Lupus will restrict itself to lupus. And just as the article on Voltaire begins

Franciscus Maria Arouet, cognomine Voltario. . . .

so the article on dogs & wolves will begin something like

Canis lupus, vulgo Canis et Lupus. . . .

The real problem begins when a common name corresponds 100% with a binomial. In that case, I'd expect the article to follow the pattern of Voltaire (above): first the full & precise name (the binomial), and then any common (pen, popular, stage, etc.) name. IacobusAmor 17:47, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My 2 nummi from Italia: I certainly agree in this case that 3 pages are merited, but think it difficult to make a hard and fast rule. On a side note, not sure how much I can contribute until the 22nd when I am back stateside. Really wish I had been quick enought to see the Fanny/Vagina thing before it was deleted... Baci & abbracci!--82.91.74.133 17:37, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you start a page under any such name, I'll block you, O anonyme totaliter incognite ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:05, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicor eum esse nostrum Ioscium. ;) IacobusAmor 18:07, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It surely was him. I was chatting with him just before that comment. He said more or less the same things as in the above comment. --Iustinus 18:09, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I had a sort of feeling ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:44, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The 3 pages already exist, the third at present being a discretiva -- but anyone who wants to expand it into a full-blown page will be welcome! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:05, 5 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Least concern species"[fontem recensere]

The category "least concern species" in english appears at the bottom, apparently as a result of the edit by UV here. I'm not sure how to fix that.--Rafaelgarcia 17:22, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the features of {{Taxobox}} are still untranslated. "Least concern species" is among those English bits of text buried deep in that template. We might as well decide to edit {{Taxobox}} to disable those not-yet localized categories indicating the conservation status. --UV 19:34, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok now I see what's wrong. I can fix it.--Rafaelgarcia 19:45, 4 Ianuarii 2009 (UTC)[reply]