Mehr Informationen bekommst Du im Gemeinschaftsportal. Du kannst Fragen im Forum oder im IRC-Chat #wikimedia-commons stellen. Du kannst auch einen Administrator auf seiner Diskussionsseite ansprechen. Sofern Du eine spezielle Frage zum Urheberrecht hast, frage auf der Seite Diskussionsseite:Lizenzen.
|(P.S. Möchtest Du diese Nachricht kommentieren?)|
spinomantis or Mantidactylus ?Edit
I've seen your reversion : maybe it is a good thing to have the two categories because nl,it and wikispecies have spinomantis but de, en, fr, pt, ... have Mantidactylus ? on a bot point of view it's better to have two categories ? Poleta33 (talk) 21:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Poleta33! I was going to write on your page after doing the reverts. Well, in general, I would think that it would be ok to keep two or more categories if classification is controversal in science. In here, the situation is quite clear, see , pdf, where a revision of Mantellidae was published. Classification after Glaw & Vences 2006 is accepted. So, it is just wrong in fr, de etc and it needs to be changed over there. That's my point of view. --AxelStrauss (talk) 21:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC) PS: A nice summary of the Mantellidae is this book, there is also a pdf online available, but it is in Malagasy language. --AxelStrauss (talk) 21:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- OK, seems to be right !
- Sorry for my mistakes :O)
- where can I find an up-to-date and trustable website for amphibians classification ? (en and fr come from ITIS) Poleta33 (talk) 21:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hei, no worries! Difficult to say. I am not too much into phylogeny but I guess amphibiaweb is ok. I just checked for a species that was described not that long ago and it is already in the database. I would always suggest to check per-reviewed publications. I know that it is often difficult to get the pdfs. --AxelStrauss (talk) 22:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hei Poleta33! Hm, according to what is visible on the pictures, they may be fine. Maybe fingers are a bit dark but adhesive disks are green what seems to be a good mark to distinguish from "similar" species. Iris colouration seems to be ok as well (if visible) and the funny spots so too. The only literature I had to check you can find here, which is quite a large and very nice pdf but restricted to a specific area. See page 94. Hope this helps. Have a nice day, AxelStrauss (talk) 09:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Zonosaurus madagascariensis or notEdit
This lizard at the California Academy of Sciences was described as the Madagascar Plated Lizard and as Zonosaurus sp. I was also puzzled when the pics of the lizard in the category looked totally different from what I saw, but decided to categorize them as such per the en Wikipedia entry. Do you know or think that it's possible that this lizard may look different depending on what habitat it has per that article, or would they all tend to look somewhat the same? If you have suggestions for better categorization, by all means let me know! Thanks. --BrokenSphere 19:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- Hi VonTasha! Oh, I obviously forgot to provide proper information. I have added it now (taken in the Etelä-Pohjanmaa region (Finland) somewhere north west of Kauhava. The nest box is made from wood, as the one you can partly see at this picture. I will look whether I can find a picture where you can see more. It was something like 30*30*70cm. Cheers, Axel Strauß (talk) 13:53, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
Dear Axel, I guess that the dung beetle illustrated in your pages under the name Scarabaeus viettei is in fact the much more interesting and less well-known species Neomnematium sevoistra. Best regards, Yves Cambefort (Paris)