Open main menu
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


You reverted my edits on Cinchonoideae incertae sedis and asked for my source. Find it here on WS with required references. Colleteria David W. Taylor (2003) is an invalid name see the explanation on Tropicos and has been replaced by Wandersong. Incidentally, Dolicholobium was placed in Condamineeae by Kainulainen et al., (2010), I have not created the required page, but will do so soon. Commons has it wrong sorry I do not contribute much here, as I do not have much in the way of media. Best regards. Andyboorman (talk) 13:58, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Andyboorman
In fact, I guessed that you had good reasons.
Just be careful of the way we site information.
The line you modified was said as coming from NCBI.
This is how you should have corrected the informations: [1]
Note the accessdate change in NCBI + the disambiguation (easy to duplicate between{{Genera}} + easy to keep when you update the Genera list) + the note containing your excellent explainations.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 14:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks duly noted and I will endeavour to learn. Cheers Andyboorman (talk) 14:11, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Category:Blacinae, Category:Blacini

Thanks for all the work you did in Blacinae. However the problem persists. The subfamily Blacinae doesn't exist anymore. It has been demoted to Tribe Blacini in subfamily Brachistinae in 2011 because of molecular studies.[2]. Wikispecies has made that correction already,[3] and so has Wikipedia [4]. I am afraid I don't know enough how to handle the changes required. I hope that you, or somebody else can update this on Wikicommons. Thanks for your work. --Polinizador (talk) 15:02, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello Polinizador
Clearly you know your subject ;-)
But I would phrase it differently: The subfamily Blacinae is not recognized by ??? anymore. (Meaning, some source still recognize Blacinae (at least BioLib and NCBI). This because it takes time for a study to be fully integrated. By the way, perhaps there will never be a general integration)
Sadly, I cannot have access to the study renaming the taxon.
Do you have external sources that follow "BARBARA J. SHARANOWSKI, ASHLEY P. G. DOWLING, MICHAEL J. SHARKEY, 2011" ?
en.wikipedia seems to follow Broad, Gavin R.; Shaw, Mark R.; Godfray, H.C. (2016)
PS: By the way, en.wikipedia is not wikipedia ;-) Just one of the wikipedias ;-)
PS2: Wikispecies still recognizes wikispecies:Blacinae ;-)
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 16:21, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

BioRéférence et Ubuntu (suite)

Re : comme tu m'y invitais j'ai toujours ces erreurs... au lancement ça m'indique :

@rem java.exe doit être dans votre path @rem java.exe must be in your path

start /low "Wikipedia Bio References" javaw.exe -Xmx256m -jar WikipediaBioReferences.jar voilà, voilà !! Sg7438 (talk

Salut {{u|Sg7438]]
Le message est assez clair ;-)
Tu dois trouver le chemin vers ton installation java
Puis ajouter ce chemin dans ton path
Dans mon cas, .bachrc contient:
export JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/java-8-oracle/jre
export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME/bin
Pour tester que tu as fait ce qu'il faut, tape "java" dans ton shell
Si ca te répond "command not found", tu n'as pas réussi ;-)
Bien cordialement Liné1 (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

SOS taxobox

Bonsoir Liné1. On a besoin d'urgence de ton avis sur le café des biologistes car un contributeur a pour ambition refondre le code des taxobox. Or sans ton WBR la vie dans le projet ne vaudrait plus la peine d'être vécue  . --Salix (talk) 21:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Salut @Salix:
C'est ou ?
Amitiés Liné1 (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
C'est ICI  . --Salix (talk) 12:02, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Category:Berberis nervosa

Can you fix this category, please? Wieralee (talk) 17:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Titis égarés

Bonjour Liné1, il y a eu des changements dans les Callicebinae. Il faudrait donc revoir le contenu de la Category:Callicebinae en conséquence. Je ne sais pas trop comment procéder sans mettre la pagaille dans les catégories actuelles, alors je te refile le titi si tu veux bien  . --Salix (talk) 12:00, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Ficus redirigé

Comme on se retrouve ! En comparant les feuillages dans la Category:Ficus citrifolia avec ceci, je viens de tomber sur cette redirection de Ficus popullifolia vers Ficus citrifolia. Or il y a deux taxons sous ce binom, dont l'un est toujours valide d'après The Plant list. Evidemment, comme les auteurs sont rarement précisés, il n'est pas facile de savoir qui est qui, mais je me demande s'il ne serait pas judicieux de rétablir une catégorie à part quand on compare ceci et cela, non ? En plus cette planche précise bien l'auteur du taxon valide, et la description de celle-ci aussi. --Salix (talk) 12:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Blacinae does not exist

According to en:Wiki, Wikispecies and to the subfamily Blacinae has been demoted to tribe Blacini. "Based on a molecular phylogenetic analysis of subfamilial relationships within Braconidae, Sharanowski et al. (2011) demoted subfamily Blacinae to tribe (Blacini), and placed this new tribe in subfamily Brachistinae." (Molecular phylogenetics of Braconidae (Hym.:Ichneumonoidea) based on multiple nuclear genes, and implications for classification). I was trying to reflect that change. These pages and categories need to be changed. Thanks for your work. --Polinizador (talk) 13:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)


Could you have a look back at Category:Magallana please? There seems to be Magallana (Q9026800) (plant) and Magallana (Q47463935) (oyster), which are mixed here. Also Category:Magallana (Q49761631), where the enwp link to commons seems to be wrong, if I understand things correctly. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Plant databases in WikipediaBioReferences

Hello my friend Liné1, the botanical database The Plant List has not been updated since 2013, and it will never be anymore. Meanwhile those lists of subtaxa and other links in WikipediaBioReferences citing TPL become rather out-of-date, e.g. the "unresolved" names, that are not unresolved in other databases. Maybe we should no longer rely on TPL too much. Would it be possible to include POWO (Kew Science Plants of the World online, in your most useful WBR program? This database seems more up-to-date, it lists its references, distributions, and I think it is helpful. Kind regards, --Thiotrix (talk) 18:13, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Liné1/2019".