Open main menu

Tech News: 2018-02

16:19, 8 January 2018 (UTC)


Hello! Is there a way we could determine if this category is an order or a suborder, and then fit it into the taxonomy links so that it is not confusing? We apparently have it as an order here, but in some of the taxonomy links, it is a suborder. While organizing zoological illustrations, I kept going in circles, such as Sauria (order)--> Gekkota --> Sauria (suborder), yet both Sauria links go to the same page (order). We can't have it both ways or people will run into problems with organization as I did. If I attempt to fix the problem my changes will be reverted, so would you please fix this problem for me? Thanks for your help! Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 16:18, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello Ruff tuff cream puff
Yes, classification is sometimes a mess.
The solution is to provide a lot of sources and explain the problem.
Then we will take the solution adopted by the majority of sources.
I will help you.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 06:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I must say that it is a mess.
Most contributors did modifications without sources.
I hate this. Liné1 (talk) 09:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-3

18:45, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


I understand. Wikidata is the way to go. JMK (talk) 10:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

So why does the English name not appear in the VN box in Commons? And where will I add vernacular names in languages that are not provided for in wikidata? JMK (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Template error...

Inicialmente, nos desculpe por usar de um tradutor automático para vos falar; como você tem sido o único editor da Template:Incorrect biology template usage/AssertEmpty, que é usada pela Template:Lepidoptera, a mesma vem gerando uma mensagem estranha onde está a ser utilizada, como na Category:Ascalapha. Se possível, pode dar uma corrigida? Grato, André Koehne TALK TO ME 12:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Au départ, nous nous excusons d'utiliser un traducteur automatique pour vous parler; comme vous avez été le seul éditeur du Template:Incorrect biology template usage/AssertEmpty, qui est utilisé par Template:Lepidoptera, il a généré un message étrange où il est utilisé, comme dans la Category:Ascalapha. Si possible, pouvez-vous donner un corrigé? Reconnaissant, André Koehne TALK TO ME 12:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello André Koehne
The error is wanted.
The template has been badly used.
There are 22 such errors that you can find in Category:Pages with incorrect biology template usage.
Of course, I am correcting them.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-04

23:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-05

17:06, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-06

20:51, 5 February 2018 (UTC)


Hallo Liné1, I answered on my talk page --Llez (talk) 17:21, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-07

21:59, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Extinct Caudata

Just wondering why two of the extinct Caudata must be categorised in both Category:Extinct Caudata as well as in the parent category Category:Caudata? Are these in some way special that COM:OVERCAT doesn't apply? - Takeaway (talk) 10:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello Takeaway,
I reverted your changes on Category:Karaurus and Category:Albanerpetontidae.
On wikicommons taxon categories must be placed in taxon categories and Category:Extinct Caudata is not considered a taxon category.
In fact Category:Extinct Caudata its parents and children correspond to a separate tree of categories.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 10:44, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
@Liné1. How about Category:Seminobatrachus? - Takeaway (talk) 10:47, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Takeaway
There are 3 purposes for putting all direct children of Caudata directly in Category:Caudata (not in Category:Extinct Caudata):
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 13:30, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
About Category:Seminobatrachus, it must be in both Category:Extinct Caudata and Category:Caudata.
Hopefully we will be able to move it from Category:Caudata to [[:Category:<AFamily>]] without having to create [[:Category:Extinct <AFamily>]]
Regards Liné1 (talk) 13:30, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your extensive reply. I best let you fill in the new Caudata categories that you have created as I'd need to read up on each and every entry first. I'm already happy having categorised Caudata by country. I hope more people will help optimise the category. Regards, - Takeaway (talk) 14:28, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-08

22:54, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-09

19:52, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Help !

Cher Liné1, je sais que tu es très occupé ici, mais pourrais-tu donner quelques réponses aux questions en souffrance sur w:fr:Discussion utilisateur:Liné1/WikipediaBioReferences  . --Salix (talk) 19:23, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-10

17:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-11

19:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Help needed with new Ordo Enterobacterales

Hello Liné1,

I thought it would be easier to rename the category from Enterobacteriales to Enterobacterales and add the new Familiae as new categories. But actually it wasn't easy and now I've noticed that you undid my actions. Let me please assure that I'm not trying to mess up anything, but only want to help maintainig the categories to the state of the art. To prove this, here are some links:

Kind regards, --A doubt (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello Liné1,
thanks again for your help, I tried to follow your example on Category:Enterobacteriaceae, e.g. here: Category:Erwinia. And the “Template LPSN” is very helpful, thank you for that one. Now I have a request: Can you insert a similar template for LPSN as a source on Wikispecies? There is already a “Template NCBI” created by you, which I have used. I don't know how to create a “Template LPSN” and since it would be like the one here on wikicommons, this way would probably generate licence problems?
Thanks in advance, --A doubt (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello A doubt
I added wikispecies:Template:LPSN. I still have a problem with the doc, but you can already use it.
Don't hesitate to ask if you want more template copy.
BR 12:39, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Hello Liné1,
You're fast, thank you! After a look at wikispecies:Category:External link templates I would not think of anything missing. But I have written another request here: wikispecies:Wikispecies talk:Templates. Maybe you can help there, too or do you know someone I could ask for that template?
Kind regards, --A doubt (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Supplement: Actually there is a “Template PMID” “missing” at wikispecies:Category:External link templates, similar to Template:PMID here on wikicommons. Your help would be appreciated. Kind regards, --A doubt (talk) 23:58, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-12

15:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-13

20:03, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

WMF Surveys, 18:22, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-14

19:29, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-15

18:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

WMF Surveys, 01:21, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-16

15:20, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

WMF Surveys, 00:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-17

18:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-18

16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-19

16:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-20

22:22, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-21

17:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


Bonjour Liné1. Est-ce qu'il est possible de changer cette catégorie en Category:Euomphaliinae? Je ne sais pas comment faire. Euompaliinae est un erreur orthographique. -- Kryp (talk) 11:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Salut Kryp. Je m'en occupe.
Amitiés Liné1 (talk) 14:34, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-26

23:10, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Asteromphalus sp by Line1.jpg

File:Asteromphalus sp by Line1.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Léna (talk) 19:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)


I've added a category for this genus, and also for its family and order, but have not added all the off-site connections.

This is part of a long-awaited update going on at WikiSpecies for the Marchantiophyta. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:38, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Addendum: The standard source classification I'm following for Wikispecies is Söderström et al., 2016. IT is a collaborative paper like APG. However, there have been some significant changes to Corsiniaceae, Exormothecaceae, and Marchantiaceae; for example, Bucegia romanica and Preissia quadrata are now considered to be species of Marchantia But I have already made the changes to those families at WSpecies, and have cited the papers for the changes in the appropriate places.

You can find the full citation to the Söderström article, and a link to all 800 pages of the article from the References section of species:Jungermanniopsida. --EncycloPetey (talk) 03:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Addendum: All pages on Wikispecies for families and higher-ranked taxa of Marchantiophyta have now been added. The family pages on Wikispecies list the current genera (all except Lejeuneaceae, which is a very large family). --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Request for help

Salu Liné1,
Today two points for your help again:
1. Yesterday I changed the templates {{Tysp}} and {{Typegenus}}. With the green color in the background we could not read the text anymore. Can you please check, if my work is ok?
2. In {{VN}} is no more a blank line between the language and name. I think, it is not a good look. Can you help?
Cheers. Orchi (talk) 17:08, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello Orchi
I corrected point 2
For point 1, I don't see the difference. In fact, I don't see background colors of{{VN}},{{SN}},{{tysp}},{{Typegenus}}...
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Salu Liné1,
...point 1: the green background was in categories only. you have time, to solve a (I think) a greater problem for Commons and Wikispecies?
Thanks for your help!! Cheers. Orchi (talk) 10:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello Orchi
You know that I have always time to help you.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 12:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Salu Liné1,
First of all thank you very much for your very kind words!!
I'll try to explain the theme in short sentences:

  • KEW has changed „Emonocot“ total.
  • in the past the link for e.g. Anacamptis was: Anacamptis
  • now the first page is: [132]
  • the next following link is: [133]
  • in the past was used the id number of KEW by Emonocot.
  • now is the id number of IPNI in use.
  • Therefore the "Templates:EMonocot" in Commons and Wikispecies are not in function more.

Can you find a way to connect the names of a genus or a species by ignoring the old ID number of KEW in the tempates? e.g. ({Emocotdir|2013|May|20|8565})

I hope, you understand my explanations. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 16:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Salu Liné1, is a great thing to have a lot of knowledge. Super!!! I have copied your work in Wikispecies also and all is in function again. Merci beaucoup. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 10:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)



I'm not sure how to handle the issues created by Category:Riella (name of a sculpture?) versus Category:Riella (plant) and the links from Category:Riellaceae, etc. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello I will show you. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello EncycloPetey,
The syntax is a bit boring: see here
But it allows to copy it to all genera list without thinking:
Also in a few years, when we will update the list, the disamb well be easely kept.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 07:06, 27 August 2018 (UTC)



Hi. t is like that. If Wikispecies is not reliable, we should consider returning to Order. Regards. --Allforrous (talk) 14:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

WBR en cours

Cher Liné1, puis-je te faire une suggestion qui serait bien utile ? Comme parfois WBR peine à consulter certaines bases, serait-il possible d'entendre un son d'alerte (en option ?) quand le résultat s'affiche ? Comme cela on pourrait travailler relax pendant qu'il mouline. --Salix (talk) 15:08, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

lol. Oui, bonne idée. Normalement il revient en premier plan à la fin de la recherche. Mais un ping est une bonne idée.
Je ne sais pas trop comment faire, mais je trouverai. Amitiés 15:18, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Cool ! Mais ne te prends pas la tête quand même pour ça, c'est juste un petit plus  . --Salix (talk) 16:15, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Category:Aegistinae (Undo revision 328337476 by Wieralee)

Liné1, the problem is in the upper category Category:Bradybaenidae. Redirected categories should be empty :( Wieralee (talk) 14:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but it does not mean that it should be done in haste without caution. Liné1 (talk) 14:26, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Anthus ruficollis

Hi Liné1 - I've changed this back again, as the BioLib source is full of errors (e.g. IOC do NOT use the non-existent name "rufogularis", and Anthus cervinus is a completely different species). I'd strongly advise rejecting this source as unreliable. Also the SN template you've been using is not good, it shows a lack of awareness of nomenclatural structure, omitting some important information, while duplicating other information unnecessarily. Simple point: for birds, just stick to IOC and optionally IUCN for conservation status; other sources should be moved to wikidata, and not listed in Commons (long lists of sources are out of Commons scope!). Hope this helps! - MPF (talk) 11:02, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

So you admit you reverted the change without correcting the problem, without even telling there is a problem...
Great job, excellent respect to other contributors.
Liné1 (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean there? I was the one who originally created the category and maintained it, and then updated it with the genus transfer; you just added "itis" spam, BioLib errors, and other such nuisances without any respect for my contributions! Why do you have to add all this irrelevant extra stuff from other sources?? I'm sorry, but your version is much more complicated without adding anything useful, including the patent nonsense of listing the current name as just a synonym, which of course it isn't. And why clutter the page up with adding avibase? They're not our avian taxonomic authority, IOC is. Put the avibase stuff in Wikidata where it belongs, not here: Commons is a file store, not a taxonomic database! - MPF (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


Salu Liné1,
I wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year 2019.
May the New Year bring peace to all of us, here and everywhere.
Thanks for your always helpful support with my questions and your solutions.
Cheers. Orchi (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Liné1/2018".