Talk:Vespadelus

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mammals: Bats Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Bats Task Force (assessed as Low-importance).

@Peter coxhead: I've been adapting to the Automatic axobox system, but see the name is now Automatic taxobox :P (Thanks again, Plantdrew!) The advantages of the system have become apparent to me, but this was particularly impressive [and mysterious] example of its resilience to error. cygnis insignis 05:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cygnis insignis: you should thank Smith609 for the redirect at {{Automatic axobox}}. It's one I've inadvertently taken advantage of too! Peter coxhead (talk) 09:23, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peter coxhead, I looked for such a thing in the list of transclusions and couldn't find it. Killing it would force an error and stop me looking silly :-) BTW, I found a monotypic genus somewhere, displaying correctly by some means: if that is split will the associated templates need tweaking or will everything fall into place? cygnis insignis 09:53, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cygnis insignis: what is normal for monospecific genera is to use a Speciesbox template on the article at the genus name. This displays the species "manually" and then picks up the rest of the classification from the genus. So if another species appears in the genus, then in terms of taxoboxes, the genus article needs to use Automatic taxobox, and each of the species articles will use Speciesbox. So long as the genus does not change classification, no change is needed to the taxonomy templates. I hope this answers your question. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:41, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(EDIT CONFLICT) @Cygnis insignis:, if you select the filters "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" in What links here (or "Show redirects only" under "External tools"), it just leaves the redirects such as Automatic axobox; see here.

Templates for formerly monotypic genera shouldn't need any modification provided the article was at the genus name title (or at a vernacular name title that applies to all species in the genus, such as osprey). However, you will need to replace a Speciesbox with an Automatic taxobox to effect a split of a monotypic genus. If the formerly monotypic genus article is at another title (binomial, vernacular name appropriate for only one species), |link= in the taxonomy template will need to be updated. Plantdrew (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Plantdrew, more good advice from another cool editor, cheers. I haven't got my head around the filters that have become available, so will have a look and play. cygnis insignis 16:52, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peter coxhead, it does, thank you for that and everything else you do to make species articles easy to create. I'm working on bats and the taxonomy is very fluid, I expect to run into splits. Can I chase you up on spiders later in the year, one of my heroes is B.Y. Main and getting some of her trapdoor species and research here is a goal. cygnis insignis 16:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]