Talk:Neozygites
Add topicLatest comment: 1 year ago by Esculenta in topic Monogeneric family?
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Monogeneric family?
[edit]The article text claims that the family is monogeneric, but what about Apterivorax? Esculenta (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- 1 2 3 the two species GBIF and CoL list are synonyms of species in Neozygites. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 20:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- All three links you gave show the opposite of what you're implying. The family is not monogeneric, and a page has now been created for it. Esculenta (talk) 17:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
Authority dates in infobox
[edit]@YorkshireExpat The dates in the infobox for the authority and parent authority have been removed, citing MOS:ORGANISM. Although MOS:ORGANISM is used, it is still not officially a policy or guideline. I do not see where it says that fungi should not have dates included in the infobox. If you can quote where the draft says that it would be very helpful.FA-Class fungi genera, such as Rhodotus and Chorioactis, put the dates in parentheses. I would like to see your opinion on this. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 20:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. Fungi are dealt with under the ICN and therefore the authorities don't include dates. I suppose putting them in brackets is a compromise, but not sure I like it. The date certainly shouldn't be after a comma (fine for ICZN authorities of course). GBIF is also generally a bit dodgy (but I do use it when there's nothing else). Mycobank is preferable for fungi in my opinion. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I usually make articles on insects and I was unaware of this. I'll keep this in mind in case I find another interesting fungus taxon. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 20:41, 25 November 2024 (UTC)