Talk:Phidippus regius
Add topic | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Draft improvements to Phidippus regius — request for feedback
[edit]Hello everyone,
The Phidippus regius page has had several reverts recently, including reversions of good-faith edits and what appears to have been some vandalism or improperly sourced material. To avoid adding to the instability of the live article, I’ve moved my proposed improvements into a sandbox for review.
My draft can be found here: User:Orange_Jones/sandbox/Pearl (named for Pearl, my own jumping spider).
The sandbox version includes:
- a cleaned and fully referenced Description section
- a new Taxonomy and Evolution section grounded in published literature
- an updated Behavior section with clarified citations
- a simplified and policy-safe Habitat section
- removal of weak or unreliable sources
- improved accessibility and plain-language scientific prose (while maintaining accuracy)
- no new images added beyond existing Commons files
My aim is to strengthen the article’s reliability, clarity, and sourcing while keeping the structure consistent with MOS:ARANEAE and related guidelines.
I would appreciate feedback on my sandbox page from editors familiar with Salticidae pages, taxonomy, or past revisions of this article before making any changes to the mainspace.
Pinging: @Peter coxhead:, @Hqb:, @Sumanuil: — your input would be very welcome.
If the draft looks acceptable after review, I’m happy to implement edits incrementally to avoid further disruption on the live page.
Thank you in advance for taking a look.
— Orange Jones Orange Jones (talk) 02:07, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
Authorities
[edit]Unfortunately neither the original reference given nor the World Spider Catalog give the correct authorities for the synonyms; both list "taxonomic references" rather than synonyms. Consider Dendryphantes regius for which both give the reference "Simon, 1901: 625". But this is when Simon transferred Koch's Phidippus regius to the genus Dendryphantes, which means that according to the ICZN the authority is "(C. L. Koch, 1846)". (In the botanical code it would be "(C. L. Koch, 1846) Simon, 1901", but the zoological code doesn't list transferrers.) This means that you have to do some 'calculations' to work out the actual authority.
See Wikipedia:WikiProject Spiders/Style guide#Synonyms. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:13, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you — this clarification is extremely helpful. I’ll review the synonym authorities and adjust them to follow the ICZN and the guidance at WikiProject Spiders. ~2025-38388-74 (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2025 (UTC)