Talk:Cryptinae

Untitled

Ok this is very detailed, where is the source for this material. We need to be careful to avoid copyright violations and to Wikipedia:Cite sources. Thanks - Taxman ^Talk 15:52, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Main source is [1]. I didn't think that a comprehensive list of taxa could be copyrighted; this list in the article has also underwent substantial (and time-consuming!) formatting modifications before it was posted. There is also no copyright symbols, text, etc. on the page in question, nor anywhere else on the site [2].

I shall also check the current status of Gelinae vs. Cryptinae; my books use the former, but the site above suggests a recent shift to the latter. 80.255 16:55, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

It needs copyedit. There are some parsing errors (like Förster's name), and most preoccupied names already had their replacement names in the list, so they could be safely removed. Nomenclator Zoologicus is ever helpful in homonymy-replacement checking.

Unfortunately it is useless in synonymy checking. I suspect a lot of names to be junior synonyms, the sequence is peculiar (a homonym, then another name, then the currently valid replacement name of the homonym - might the second name be a junior synonym?)

Indeed, e.g. Cratocryptoides Schmiedeknecht, 1908 is a replacement name of Cratocryptus Cameron, 1905 (non Thomson, 1873), but this makes it a junior synonym of the older replacement name, Cratocryptodes Schulz, 1906.

And no, complete taxonomic lists are not eligible for copyright. Species lists of some locality might be because they require nontrivial effort to compile, but that's another matter. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 11:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's full of synonyms. Somebody please use for example this and this to clear up synonymy. I have not deleted but out-commented some synonymous taxa already, so that the information can be simply added to articles of valid genera as these are started, and does not need to be dug up again. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)