![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2017 September 28. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
What are we supposed to do with the parameters like regnum, classis, etc? Are they for the largest group which includes all the included groups? If so, then seaweed would be Life (if the cyanobacteria are included) or Eukaryote if not. The whole thing is potentially confusing - taxoboxes start at the top (typically kingdom) and proceed to the taxon for the article (the same as the one in the "name" parameters) in a parameter is species, group, etc. What is the list of taxa in this template supposed to end with?
A related question: what about polyphyletic groups like seaweed? Is this template supposed to be for them or just for paraphyletic groups? Kingdon ( talk) 14:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
So I was trying to add this to
Dicotyledon, a paraphyletic (or polyphyletic, one of those cases where I don't think it is fully clear which) group which has had a taxobox for a while. I gather some are dubious about taxoboxes on paraphyletic groups, but the problem here is adding the included and excluded groups. 6 of the 8 are (or could be) taxa, but not
eudicot or
magnoliid (eventually there will perhaps be well-accepted taxa for these, but right now most researchers in the field seem to use unranked names for these, not taxa in the sense of the
ICBN). Would a good fix be to rename "included taxa" to "included groups" or "included clades" or some such?
I was going to put in included as:
and excluded as:
Kingdon ( talk) 17:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The quotation marks surrounding the group name were recently removed from the template. I have restored them, because scientific convention denotes paraphyletic groups by placing quotation marks around the group name. It is important to make this distinction, as the paraphyletic group box looks at a glance like a standard taxobox, and readers should not be misled into thinking that a paraphyletic group forms a natural clade. Martin ( Smith609 – Talk) 12:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
|name=
is set by editors on each page and may either be a common name or the paraphyletic group name. It may not be appropriate in every use of this template. I do think it's important to somehow flag this template as different from the regular taxobox format, however, I think it should be clearer than just quotes in the name field, which to a reader isn't a clear indicator of paraphyly. This may not be a high-profile template like the taxobox, but let's leave it as it was until it's clear this is the right change to make.
Rkitko (
talk)
01:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help)How can I get the virus_group parameter to show up? See Torque teno sus virus. -- Nessie ( talk) 02:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
|virus_group=
by copy-pasting the code for one of the other rank parameters and changing it for virus_group. By rudimentary support, I mean that it only shows the parameter value exactly as entered (e.g. "ii"); I guess another template needs to be called to show the description of the nucleic acid composition for each virus group, and I'm not sure how to do that. Maybe @
Peter coxhead: can help bring this template up to date.
Plantdrew (
talk)@ Peter coxhead, Plantdrew, and NessieVL: I've grasped the opportunity to delve into the inner workings of the taxobox systems and have knocked up a prototype Module:Paraphyletic group for template {{ Paraphyletic group}}. The formating still needs some more work and not all the features have been added, but it's a start. Some examples including algae, lizards and Torque teno sus virus can be found at my test page User:Jts1882/sandbox/test/taxobox. Jts1882 | talk 14:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
|auto=yes
. A better version is in {{
Paraphyletic group/sandbox}} and I should update this. Some examples are in
User:Jts1882/sandbox/test/taxobox/para, including an example using
Torque teno sus virus with the automatic taxonomy (set using |auto=virus
).
Jts1882 |
talk
10:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
and |parent=
? --
Nessie (
talk)
13:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
and |parent=
should work. Using |parent=
means the last taxon is wikilinked. Use |taxon=
if you don't want it linked. For viruses use |auto=virus
. There are a number of virus taxoboxes using {{
paraphyletic group}} which should be able to now use the automatic taxobox system. I think I have it so the behaviour is the same as {{
virusbox}}, but let me know if there are any differences.
Jts1882 |
talk
14:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
to a maintenance category such as
Category:Paraphyletic group infoboxes with manual taxonomy ( 2 )? --
Nessie (
talk)
19:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)|auto=virus
so |virus=yes
gets passed to the automatic taxobomy module.I'm running across a few articles using this template that use an obsolete taxon for the grade along with the authority. Examples include Rhamphorhynchoidea, Agnatha, and lizard (the last two have the authority commented out). Is there a way to display these in automated mode, or must it be in manual? -- Nessie ( talk) 19:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
|taxon=
rather than |parent=
in the usual automatic taxobox manner. The parent parameter is used with the automatic taxonomy handling of viruses, but can also be used to force a wikilink (e.g. in
whale). I don't think that suborder
Lacertilia should be displayed for lizard as it is no longer used.|excluded_text=
which can change the heading for the excluded groups. It defaults to "
Cladistically included but traditionally excluded taxa" because that was past practice, but it is a very clumsy phrase and I think the simpler "Groups excluded" is more suitable in most cases.
Jts1882 |
talk
07:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)This seems very odd in context. It lists a number of entities that aren't included, but that -- in the examples I've encountered, which are all viruses -- do not fall within the purview of the title of the article, eg HIV. In some cases a long list is unattractive and throws out the formatting of the article. Can this be made optional, or hidden in some way? I can't see how it is helpful to readers. Espresso Addict ( talk) 20:48, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
|excludes=
parameter. Obviously this needs consensus on the relevant pages. The lists can also be hidden using collapsible content. If you can give an example of content to hide I can show you how to do it.
Jts1882 |
talk
21:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Human immunodeficiency viruses | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Scanning electron micrograph of HIV-1 (in green) budding from cultured lymphocyte. Multiple round bumps on cell surface represent sites of assembly and budding of virions. | |
Scientific classification
![]() | |
(unranked): | Virus |
Realm: | Riboviria |
Kingdom: | Pararnavirae |
Phylum: | Artverviricota |
Class: | Revtraviricetes |
Order: | Ortervirales |
Family: | Retroviridae |
Subfamily: | Orthoretrovirinae |
Genus: | Lentivirus |
HIV viruses | |
Non-HIV viruses in same clade | |
|excludes=
parameter. The example to the right shows you one way how to collapse the list (using {{
Collapsible list}}) and also how to change the text header from the rather awkwardly phrased default.
Jts1882 |
talk
09:54, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I feel this box could use |subdivision_ref=
, like with {{
Automatic taxobox}} and {{
virusbox}}. Is that possible? --
Nessie (
📥)
16:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
|subdivision=
, |includes=
, |excludes=
and |synonyms=
have corresponding parameters |subdivision_ref=
, |includes_ref=
, |excludes_ref=
and |synonyms_ref=
. There are also _text
suffix parameters that can change the heading title.
Jts1882 |
talk
17:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
|subdivision_ref=
without using |subdivision=
. I switched to |includes_ref=
and |excludes_ref=
and it displays now. Thanks! --
Nessie (
📥)
17:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)@ DexDor:, why not add pages to Category:Paraphyletic groups ( 146 ) using this template? -- awkwafaba ( 📥) 01:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
list
|
---|
|
In this edit, MathEvo changed the rank of Crustacea from subphylum to a phrase not recognized by the automated taxobox system, thereby causing the taxonomy template to be put into an error-tracking category.
As far as I am aware, it is perfectly acceptable under the ICZN to use a Linnaean rank here; there's no requirement for a taxon at any rank not to be paraphyletic.
However, I think it might be useful if the "rank" in the taxobox had something like "(paraphyletic)" attached. If agreed, this could be done automatically by {{
Paraphyletic group}}
I think.
Peter coxhead (
talk)
17:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
rank=subordo (paraphyletic)
and detect it in the code or add a parameter to the taxonomy templates. Both would need to be handled in
Module:Autotaxobox.|comment=
parameter in the taxonomy templates to explain any issues, such as choice of source being followed, use of skip templates, or anything else not obvious to an editor. I sometimes just add an HTML comment to the |refs=
, but this would formalise it and perhaps encourage more explanation.
Crustacea (paraphyletic with respect to Hexapoda)
| |
---|---|
Scientific classification
![]() | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Arthropoda |
Clade: | Pancrustacea |
Subphylum: | Crustacea |
|subheader=
parameter that displays below the name.—
Jts1882 |
talk
18:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
In September, Template:Taxonomy/Multicrustacea (and others) had the parent changed from subphylum Crustacea to clade Pancrustacea (Crustacea is set to always display). There is a recent (last post was yesterday) discussion at Template talk:Arthropods about what to do with Crustacea/Pancrustacea. I think the last discussion of crustacea on a project page was a year ago at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arthropods/Archive_7#Hexanauplia_is_unaccepted_by_WoRMS. Talk:Crustacean#Article_is_outdated_and_inaccurate was initiated in September by the editor who changed the taxonomy templates. Crustacea probably needs to be discussed some more in a broader forum (TOL or WP Arthropods). At the moment there are only two articles at link to Crustacea by a taxobox. Plantdrew ( talk) 21:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Kangaroo | |
---|---|
Scientific classification
![]() | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Chordata |
Class: | Mammalia |
Infraclass: | Marsupialia |
Order: | Diprotodontia |
Suborder: | Macropodiformes |
Family: | Macropodidae |
Informal group: | Kangaroo |
Template:Taxonomy/ "rank informal group"
produces 36 taxonomy templates, so "informal group" is not much used, but has existed in {{
anglicise rank}} for a long time.![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
![]() | This template was considered for deletion on 2017 September 28. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
What are we supposed to do with the parameters like regnum, classis, etc? Are they for the largest group which includes all the included groups? If so, then seaweed would be Life (if the cyanobacteria are included) or Eukaryote if not. The whole thing is potentially confusing - taxoboxes start at the top (typically kingdom) and proceed to the taxon for the article (the same as the one in the "name" parameters) in a parameter is species, group, etc. What is the list of taxa in this template supposed to end with?
A related question: what about polyphyletic groups like seaweed? Is this template supposed to be for them or just for paraphyletic groups? Kingdon ( talk) 14:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
So I was trying to add this to
Dicotyledon, a paraphyletic (or polyphyletic, one of those cases where I don't think it is fully clear which) group which has had a taxobox for a while. I gather some are dubious about taxoboxes on paraphyletic groups, but the problem here is adding the included and excluded groups. 6 of the 8 are (or could be) taxa, but not
eudicot or
magnoliid (eventually there will perhaps be well-accepted taxa for these, but right now most researchers in the field seem to use unranked names for these, not taxa in the sense of the
ICBN). Would a good fix be to rename "included taxa" to "included groups" or "included clades" or some such?
I was going to put in included as:
and excluded as:
Kingdon ( talk) 17:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
The quotation marks surrounding the group name were recently removed from the template. I have restored them, because scientific convention denotes paraphyletic groups by placing quotation marks around the group name. It is important to make this distinction, as the paraphyletic group box looks at a glance like a standard taxobox, and readers should not be misled into thinking that a paraphyletic group forms a natural clade. Martin ( Smith609 – Talk) 12:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
|name=
is set by editors on each page and may either be a common name or the paraphyletic group name. It may not be appropriate in every use of this template. I do think it's important to somehow flag this template as different from the regular taxobox format, however, I think it should be clearer than just quotes in the name field, which to a reader isn't a clear indicator of paraphyly. This may not be a high-profile template like the taxobox, but let's leave it as it was until it's clear this is the right change to make.
Rkitko (
talk)
01:21, 4 October 2013 (UTC){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help); Missing or empty |title=
(
help)How can I get the virus_group parameter to show up? See Torque teno sus virus. -- Nessie ( talk) 02:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
|virus_group=
by copy-pasting the code for one of the other rank parameters and changing it for virus_group. By rudimentary support, I mean that it only shows the parameter value exactly as entered (e.g. "ii"); I guess another template needs to be called to show the description of the nucleic acid composition for each virus group, and I'm not sure how to do that. Maybe @
Peter coxhead: can help bring this template up to date.
Plantdrew (
talk)@ Peter coxhead, Plantdrew, and NessieVL: I've grasped the opportunity to delve into the inner workings of the taxobox systems and have knocked up a prototype Module:Paraphyletic group for template {{ Paraphyletic group}}. The formating still needs some more work and not all the features have been added, but it's a start. Some examples including algae, lizards and Torque teno sus virus can be found at my test page User:Jts1882/sandbox/test/taxobox. Jts1882 | talk 14:32, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
|auto=yes
. A better version is in {{
Paraphyletic group/sandbox}} and I should update this. Some examples are in
User:Jts1882/sandbox/test/taxobox/para, including an example using
Torque teno sus virus with the automatic taxonomy (set using |auto=virus
).
Jts1882 |
talk
10:23, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
and |parent=
? --
Nessie (
talk)
13:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
and |parent=
should work. Using |parent=
means the last taxon is wikilinked. Use |taxon=
if you don't want it linked. For viruses use |auto=virus
. There are a number of virus taxoboxes using {{
paraphyletic group}} which should be able to now use the automatic taxobox system. I think I have it so the behaviour is the same as {{
virusbox}}, but let me know if there are any differences.
Jts1882 |
talk
14:37, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
|auto=yes
to a maintenance category such as
Category:Paraphyletic group infoboxes with manual taxonomy ( 2 )? --
Nessie (
talk)
19:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)|auto=virus
so |virus=yes
gets passed to the automatic taxobomy module.I'm running across a few articles using this template that use an obsolete taxon for the grade along with the authority. Examples include Rhamphorhynchoidea, Agnatha, and lizard (the last two have the authority commented out). Is there a way to display these in automated mode, or must it be in manual? -- Nessie ( talk) 19:37, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
|taxon=
rather than |parent=
in the usual automatic taxobox manner. The parent parameter is used with the automatic taxonomy handling of viruses, but can also be used to force a wikilink (e.g. in
whale). I don't think that suborder
Lacertilia should be displayed for lizard as it is no longer used.|excluded_text=
which can change the heading for the excluded groups. It defaults to "
Cladistically included but traditionally excluded taxa" because that was past practice, but it is a very clumsy phrase and I think the simpler "Groups excluded" is more suitable in most cases.
Jts1882 |
talk
07:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)This seems very odd in context. It lists a number of entities that aren't included, but that -- in the examples I've encountered, which are all viruses -- do not fall within the purview of the title of the article, eg HIV. In some cases a long list is unattractive and throws out the formatting of the article. Can this be made optional, or hidden in some way? I can't see how it is helpful to readers. Espresso Addict ( talk) 20:48, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
|excludes=
parameter. Obviously this needs consensus on the relevant pages. The lists can also be hidden using collapsible content. If you can give an example of content to hide I can show you how to do it.
Jts1882 |
talk
21:13, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Human immunodeficiency viruses | |
---|---|
![]() | |
Scanning electron micrograph of HIV-1 (in green) budding from cultured lymphocyte. Multiple round bumps on cell surface represent sites of assembly and budding of virions. | |
Scientific classification
![]() | |
(unranked): | Virus |
Realm: | Riboviria |
Kingdom: | Pararnavirae |
Phylum: | Artverviricota |
Class: | Revtraviricetes |
Order: | Ortervirales |
Family: | Retroviridae |
Subfamily: | Orthoretrovirinae |
Genus: | Lentivirus |
HIV viruses | |
Non-HIV viruses in same clade | |
|excludes=
parameter. The example to the right shows you one way how to collapse the list (using {{
Collapsible list}}) and also how to change the text header from the rather awkwardly phrased default.
Jts1882 |
talk
09:54, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I feel this box could use |subdivision_ref=
, like with {{
Automatic taxobox}} and {{
virusbox}}. Is that possible? --
Nessie (
📥)
16:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
|subdivision=
, |includes=
, |excludes=
and |synonyms=
have corresponding parameters |subdivision_ref=
, |includes_ref=
, |excludes_ref=
and |synonyms_ref=
. There are also _text
suffix parameters that can change the heading title.
Jts1882 |
talk
17:00, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
|subdivision_ref=
without using |subdivision=
. I switched to |includes_ref=
and |excludes_ref=
and it displays now. Thanks! --
Nessie (
📥)
17:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)@ DexDor:, why not add pages to Category:Paraphyletic groups ( 146 ) using this template? -- awkwafaba ( 📥) 01:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
list
|
---|
|
In this edit, MathEvo changed the rank of Crustacea from subphylum to a phrase not recognized by the automated taxobox system, thereby causing the taxonomy template to be put into an error-tracking category.
As far as I am aware, it is perfectly acceptable under the ICZN to use a Linnaean rank here; there's no requirement for a taxon at any rank not to be paraphyletic.
However, I think it might be useful if the "rank" in the taxobox had something like "(paraphyletic)" attached. If agreed, this could be done automatically by {{
Paraphyletic group}}
I think.
Peter coxhead (
talk)
17:22, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
rank=subordo (paraphyletic)
and detect it in the code or add a parameter to the taxonomy templates. Both would need to be handled in
Module:Autotaxobox.|comment=
parameter in the taxonomy templates to explain any issues, such as choice of source being followed, use of skip templates, or anything else not obvious to an editor. I sometimes just add an HTML comment to the |refs=
, but this would formalise it and perhaps encourage more explanation.
Crustacea (paraphyletic with respect to Hexapoda)
| |
---|---|
Scientific classification
![]() | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Arthropoda |
Clade: | Pancrustacea |
Subphylum: | Crustacea |
|subheader=
parameter that displays below the name.—
Jts1882 |
talk
18:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
In September, Template:Taxonomy/Multicrustacea (and others) had the parent changed from subphylum Crustacea to clade Pancrustacea (Crustacea is set to always display). There is a recent (last post was yesterday) discussion at Template talk:Arthropods about what to do with Crustacea/Pancrustacea. I think the last discussion of crustacea on a project page was a year ago at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arthropods/Archive_7#Hexanauplia_is_unaccepted_by_WoRMS. Talk:Crustacean#Article_is_outdated_and_inaccurate was initiated in September by the editor who changed the taxonomy templates. Crustacea probably needs to be discussed some more in a broader forum (TOL or WP Arthropods). At the moment there are only two articles at link to Crustacea by a taxobox. Plantdrew ( talk) 21:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Kangaroo | |
---|---|
Scientific classification
![]() | |
Domain: | Eukaryota |
Kingdom: | Animalia |
Phylum: | Chordata |
Class: | Mammalia |
Infraclass: | Marsupialia |
Order: | Diprotodontia |
Suborder: | Macropodiformes |
Family: | Macropodidae |
Informal group: | Kangaroo |
Template:Taxonomy/ "rank informal group"
produces 36 taxonomy templates, so "informal group" is not much used, but has existed in {{
anglicise rank}} for a long time.