Talk:Quenda

Subspecies

Per WP:MAMMALS, we should not list this as a species. Our current policy is that we list anything as it appears in MSW3, unless both the IUCN and ASM agree on a change in status. Since the IUCN does not agree with the ASM here, we should list this as a subspecies. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The IUCN and MSW3 information is outdated (last assessed 2014) rather than in disagreement with current research.

As it is considered an important species in (Western) Australia, worthy of research and conservation, updates need to be diseminated ASAP.

My main aim though, was to provide an information page linked to the iNaturalist species "about" page where I.fusciventer is recognized as a species by ASM and AFD et al. and is monitored under local WA Conservation status P4.

As such, is there any way to proceed regardless? Andocommando WA (talk) 05:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Your purpose is WP:ISNOT what Wikipedia is about. To wit, that's the thinking of creating a directory where people can link from to get to new information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and we have a different standard to maintain. I agree that the IUCN is old on this, and MSW3 even older. However, that's where our current consensus stands. If you wish to open a dialogue to update the current thinking, it should be on the broad level of WP:MAMMALS and not on an individual taxon. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Conservation status update

As mentioned in the article, their status is reported as near threatened but the article's status image has them as least concern 103.140.93.77 (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

They are LC per IUCN, which is shown in the taxobox and the associated reference. This is an international status. The NT status is the local WA status. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)