Talk:Outline of zoology

Rename proposal for this page and all the pages of the set this page belongs to

See the proposal at the Village pump

The Transhumanist 09:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Guidelines for outlines

Guidelines for the development of outlines are being drafted at Wikipedia:Outlines.

Your input and feedback is welcomed and encouraged.

The Transhumanist 00:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The "History of" section needs links!

Please add some relevant links to the history section.

Links can be found in the "History of" article for this subject, in the "History of" category for this subject, or in the corresponding navigation templates. Or you could search for topics on Google - most topics turn blue when added to Wikipedia as internal links.

The Transhumanist 00:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Regarding "Animals (by common name)"

1. is this list necessary? It is simply alphabetical, not at all hierarchical. see Wikipedia:Outlines#How to develop a good outline.
2. if so, can it be placed into columns to better utilize space?
3. if kept, there should be clearly defined inclusion criteria. "Well-known types" is extremely subjective, and the list already appears somewhat biased and arbitrary: Arrow crab and Xerinae are nowhere near as well-known as Duck and Snake. --Animalparty-- (talk) 23:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines

"Outline" is short for "hierarchical outline". There are two types of outlines: sentence outlines (like those you made in school to plan a paper), and topic outlines (like the topical synopses that professors hand out at the beginning of a college course). Outlines on Wikipedia are primarily topic outlines that serve 2 main purposes: they provide taxonomical classification of subjects showing what topics belong to a subject and how they are related to each other (via their placement in the tree structure), and as subject-based tables of contents linked to topics in the encyclopedia. The hierarchy is maintained through the use of heading levels and indented bullets. See Wikipedia:Outlines for a more in-depth explanation. The Transhumanist 00:12, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Animal list

While the animal list section linked to lists of animals it was much more impressive than anything there. I dont fully understand why it was here, it seems a much beter fit there to me. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 00:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

When you engage in reverts, User:The Transhumanist you need to enageg actively in the already open discussion, an edit summary will not suffice. I removed the list to Lists of animals which is a better fit and if you object to the list having been removed by User:SchreiberBike you should engage in talk page discussion there. This is not even the first thread about this list here and it appears nobody other than you wants it on wikipedia, and certainly not on this page, a truly useless list as it happens, mixing genera and classes. You need to build a consensus to have the list ehre and not assume that your opinion alone suffices and that you dont need to engage in an already open discussion. there is a thread on my talk page about this too. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 15:55, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

I believe there is no consensus for the move or deletion of this material. The list has been here for years, and therefore, a new consensus needs to emerge in order to remove it. The consensus, by default, is the configuration of the page the way you found it. The reason I reverted the removal of the material from here is twofold: 1) per WP:BRD (you were bold, I reverted, and now you need to discuss the matter to achieve a new consensus before your change gets implemented), and 2) someone else reverted your move of the material at its destination, making your edit here a deletion of the material from the encyclopedia. Your moving of the material has been voted down (reverted) at both ends. Your blanking the section now borders upon vandalism. I've restored the material. You need to stop until a new consensus has been achieved. The Transhumanist 17:47, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Squeakbox, as the outline is an overview of zoology, it presents some examples of animals. The list is not meant to be comprehensive or technical, it's just a simple introduction. The Transhumanist 18:14, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@The Transhumanist and SqueakBox: I'm the person who deleted the list when it was at Lists of animals. I thought that a list which included both Basset Hound, a breed, and bird, a class, seemed unhelpful. I don't see it fitting in here either. As described in the section above, #Quick explanation of Wikipedia outlines, an alphabetical list of what appears to be a random selection of animals at various taxonomic ranks doesn't fit. I'm not sure how it helps the reader and without criteria for inclusion the list could go into the millions.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

If a list of animals is required we can produce a good one easily, this isnt an appropriate list as an outline of zoology, though, which is whuy I removed it from this article. I sugegst we replace it with a decent, illustrated list, I am sure I can come up with one relatoively quickly. I dont care if you want to put it elsewhere where it MIGHT be appropriate but not here. We need a list of species organized say by phyla and all illustrated. meanwhile I support tremoving this list from here. There is clearly NOT a consensus to keepit here and that it has been here years is a very weak argument that could be used to stop editing except for updates using 2015 refs. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 19:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

And your claims, @The Transhumanist: that I am being "voted down (reverted) at both end" is simply a false take on events. I obtained consensus with Schreiber and you had no reason to assume he supports your keeping this list here. You edit warred while claiming others weren't discusing on this page (that was you not discussing), and then when you finally made an appearance you come here absolutely furious and playing the blame game against me. Please consider changing this attitude, I find it not conducive to solving this issue. And right now you appear to need to build a consensus for your solitary viewpoint. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 19:06, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

"Furious" is a false take. The only one who seems to be getting emotional here is you. Also, characterizing 2 rounds of editing as an edit war, is also a false take, especially since the reasons for each edit were posted, meaning communication was taking place, initially in edit summaries, and then with discussion on this talk page by the 2nd round. Besides, I wasn't the one who reverted the initial revert (doing so violates the spirit of WP:BRD).

The important thing is not to leave a blatant gap in the article: an outline on zoology without any animals in it would seem to be a major oversight. However, you mentioned that you can come up with such a list (and illustrated) relatively quickly. I wholehearted support the inclusion of an animal list, perhaps along the lines of Wikipedia:Summary style. The Transhumanist 19:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

In Animal in the infobox along the right side under the heading Phyla is what appears to me to be an outline of the taxa in zoology. I have no biology background, but would that be a good place to start?  SchreiberBike | ⌨  19:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, Transhumanist, if you werent angry that makes your blaming much worse, to my mind, and you arent a new editor here. I did my best to try to keep the list on wikipedia itself, as the record shows, so for you then to blame me for it disappearing from wikipedia is just blind kicking out. I also failed to appreciate you directing me to this talk page to discuss the issue when I had been waiting for days for you to participate in the hthread I opened, again as the record shows. I have anyway deposited the list I promised in User:SqueakBox/sandbox, I am not entirely happy with the formatting but it is a list of animals. No mixing classes and species though some like snail are perhaps less specific than others, and for me the most important factor is that it illustrates the animals in question. Its obviously free to be used, either here or in the lists of animals article.♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 05:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

You said you tried your best to keep the list on WP, but you deleted it here (again) after it had been deleted on the other page. And you told ShreiberBike concerning his deletion of the list: "I dont personally object as my input has been minimal and I'm not willing to work on it". That doesn't appear to be your best effort (considering your long history of contributions), or that you even cared at all about what happened to the list at that point. However, that's moot now, since both of us have been working on the problems created by the situation (working on filling the gap left by the deletion, or saving the deleted list). I appreciate the work you've done in the sandbox, and you and ShreiberBike have convinced me that the (alphabetical) common name list isn't a very good fit on the outline—it's not taxonomical, which it should be since it can be expressed in multiple levels while at the same time being part of a hierarchical outline. This is quite odd, since I've been championing that viewpoint (hierarchical structure in outlines) for years (since the beginning of the outline project). With respect to retaining the content of that list of common names, fortunately, it turned out that the list is a content fork of List of animal names, with which it shares the same scope. I've posted it (the list) on the talk page there as a temporary holding spot, and have started merging it into that list article. The Transhumanist 07:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

That merge didn't work out, which led to the creation of List of animals by common name. Problem solved. The Transhumanist 20:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)