Talk:Red side-necked turtle

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Dger in topic Proposed merger with the Rhinemys page

Synonyms

edit

I have updated the synonymy to utilise Rhodin, 2011, I kept some of the information from Fritz and Havas, 2007. However some of the species in the earlier synonymy are now included in Mesoclemmys gibba. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 21:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Is there is a reason you have kept some of the dashes? Can we remove those? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:00, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
yep missed them, should be gone now. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 22:18, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Synonyms

edit

In the example "Chelys (Hydraspis) rufipes Gray, 1831", what is meant by the "Hydraspis" part? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hydraspis is an old name for Phrynops and Gray decided it was a sub genus of Chelys not considered correct in any way but is a part of the history. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 22:25, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
So according to Gray(at that time) its binomial name was Chelys rufipes? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 22:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
Thats correct, Chelys is a junior synonym of Chelus or the Matamata. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 14:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merger with the Rhinemys page

edit

As this is a monotypic genus and with little additive content by having both a genus and a species page I propose that the two pages be merged under the species page. A number of other monotypic genera are already dealt with in the same way I think it makes sense to continue this practice. A redirect for the genus name can be made for searching to assist readers. The combined genus and species page would have more content on that page than either could alone. Faendalimas talk 15:25, 8 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yep I am recommending the genus article be a redirect to the species article. Cheers, Faendalimas talk 23:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose


  • Comments
    • I would oppose redirecting(moving article) from the species to the genus even when WP:FNAME has been read to imply doing just that. My thinking is the article title should matches it's contents, and not confuse the reader. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)Reply