![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following talk is a copy from
HERE :
Hi. I was wandering if you do animalia too? If so, HERE is one that might need a second set of eyes. Thank you! Mercy11 ( talk) 15:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I know a little about animals, but not much. It looks pretty good to me. Unfortunately, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles seems to be pretty dead. I'm not sure how to resolve the Alsophis/ Borikenophis issue. I'll look into it a little further. Plantdrew ( talk) 23:02, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Borikenophis portoricensis is probably the scientific name to go with; EOL lists some treatments in different databases; EOL ultimately follows ITIS in treating it as Alsophis portoricensis, but the ITIS record hasn't been updated since 2004, and the name B. portoricensis was first published in 2009. Sources since 2009 seem to be mostly classifying it as B. portoricensis. But the title is a whole other issue. The former genus-mates in Alsophis are titled by common names. So perhaps the title should be Puerto Rican racer, but Borikenophis lists "Puerto Rican racer" also as a "common" name for another species (and the English "common" name was first coined by scientists for a snake which might be most commonly known as "culebra corredora" by the people who encounter it on a regular basis). Reptile articles seem to use a mix of common names and scientific names. I'm happy leaving it at Alsophis portoricensis for now and letting a future editor who's get a better handle on how to deal with reptile articles figure it out. Plantdrew ( talk) 04:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps additional editors might care to comment.
I see two issues to deal with:
Thanks, Mercy11 ( talk) 13:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following talk is a copy from
HERE :
Hi. I was wandering if you do animalia too? If so, HERE is one that might need a second set of eyes. Thank you! Mercy11 ( talk) 15:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I know a little about animals, but not much. It looks pretty good to me. Unfortunately, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles seems to be pretty dead. I'm not sure how to resolve the Alsophis/ Borikenophis issue. I'll look into it a little further. Plantdrew ( talk) 23:02, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Borikenophis portoricensis is probably the scientific name to go with; EOL lists some treatments in different databases; EOL ultimately follows ITIS in treating it as Alsophis portoricensis, but the ITIS record hasn't been updated since 2004, and the name B. portoricensis was first published in 2009. Sources since 2009 seem to be mostly classifying it as B. portoricensis. But the title is a whole other issue. The former genus-mates in Alsophis are titled by common names. So perhaps the title should be Puerto Rican racer, but Borikenophis lists "Puerto Rican racer" also as a "common" name for another species (and the English "common" name was first coined by scientists for a snake which might be most commonly known as "culebra corredora" by the people who encounter it on a regular basis). Reptile articles seem to use a mix of common names and scientific names. I'm happy leaving it at Alsophis portoricensis for now and letting a future editor who's get a better handle on how to deal with reptile articles figure it out. Plantdrew ( talk) 04:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps additional editors might care to comment.
I see two issues to deal with:
Thanks, Mercy11 ( talk) 13:12, 27 August 2013 (UTC)