User talk:Liné1/2014: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot (talk | contribs)
m Robot: Archiving 2 threads from User talk:Liné1.
MiszaBot (talk | contribs)
m Robot: Archiving 2 threads from User talk:Liné1.
Line 41: Line 41:
::::: Cheers [[User:Liné1|Liné1]] ([[User talk:Liné1#top|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 09:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
::::: Cheers [[User:Liné1|Liné1]] ([[User talk:Liné1#top|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 09:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
:::::: Thank you :) --[[User:Thiotrix|Thiotrix]] ([[User talk:Thiotrix|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 10:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
:::::: Thank you :) --[[User:Thiotrix|Thiotrix]] ([[User talk:Thiotrix|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 10:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
== Script error ==

Bonjour Liné1, je ne sais pas si cela te concerne mais il y a des "script error" sur les références, par exemple sur [[:Category:Coendou]] --[[User:Salix|Salix]] ([[User talk:Salix|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 21:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
:C'est un bug wikipedia. Mais j'ai fait un contournement. Merci beaucoup. Amitiés [[User:Liné1|Liné1]] ([[User talk:Liné1#top|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 07:44, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
::Bravo. C'est rentré dans l'ordre. --[[User:Salix|Salix]] ([[User talk:Salix|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 09:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

== Lua ==

Liné1, regarding your question about mw.wikibase.getEntity() in [[Module:Wikidata4Bio]] (on my talkpage): I have little experience with LUA on commons, and am currently limited in time. I suggest you wait for other responses or ask the question elsewhere, for instance at [[:d:Wikidata:Project chat]]. [[User:HenkvD|HenkvD]] ([[User talk:HenkvD|<span class="signature-talk">talk</span>]]) 19:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:12, 8 April 2014

Templates

Hi Liné - I fear I'm not fully sure what your request is, I'm not too familiar with workings of templates! Otherwise, I also have serious doubts as to whether we should support itis links at all, at least not for plants or birds, as it is not (in both my experience, and that of several others), not a good database to use: out of date, partisan (not independent), and very incomplete but without saying so (with the unwritten implication that taxa it doesn't list, are not valid). Any thoughts?

All the best for 2014! - MPF (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

KEW list

Dear Liné1,
Bravo, Bravissimo! Your Kew list for nothospecies is better in function as the own search line of KEW.
Cheers. Orchi (talk) 21:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Question

Hi Liné1. Question: Category:Cultural heritage monuments should be used for: a) files, b) categories, or c) the two. Thanks. Allforrous (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry my friend, I am working on the biology part of wikipedia.
But there is a banner saying that it should contain only categories.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 06:19, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Synonyms in WikipediaBioReferences

Hello Liné1,
WBR marks the database link of a name as "invalid", if it is not a current name. This statement seems a bit problematic, because in taxonomy an "invalid name" means, that it has been published without a valid description or is in conflict with the rules of the International Codes of Biological Nomenclature. So it does not mean the same as "synonym", which is a not current or not accepted name. Can you please replace the misleading word? - Greetings --Thiotrix (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

I am not sure it is in WBR, but more certainly in the commons template (I am still certainly guilty ;-)). What template are you talking of (Tropicos...) ? Because from what you say, this seems to be botanic specific ?
Cheers 09:26, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
here is an example Category:Leccinum percandidum: the first Index Fungorum name is not accepted and is boldly marked as "invalid". - Cheers --Thiotrix (talk) 19:54, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
OK, then problem is in Fungorum species.
All the templates of Category:Biology external link templates have the same display 'Invalid' except ThePlantList species and Tropicos that displays 'Considered a synonym'
I did put 'Considered a synonym' after [discussion].
  1. Do you like 'Considered a synonym' ?
  2. What template should I impact:
But in Zoology, 'Invalid' is correct, I think.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 20:40, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
For ThePlantList, "considered a synonym" is ok, as we discussed earlier, because of its third group of "unresolved" names. For other plants (Kew, Tropicos), algae, and fungi, I would prefer "not accepted" instead of "invalid": these names are mostly synonyms, additionally some rejected or illegitimate names, and only very few invalid (= not validly published) ones. But for zoology, the tems invalid seems to be correct, I think. - Cheers --Thiotrix (talk) 08:29, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done. That's the reason why I created those templates in the first place ;-)
By the way, take the last WBR there are a lot of correction for commons.
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 09:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you :) --Thiotrix (talk) 10:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Script error

Bonjour Liné1, je ne sais pas si cela te concerne mais il y a des "script error" sur les références, par exemple sur Category:Coendou --Salix (talk) 21:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

C'est un bug wikipedia. Mais j'ai fait un contournement. Merci beaucoup. Amitiés Liné1 (talk) 07:44, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
Bravo. C'est rentré dans l'ordre. --Salix (talk) 09:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Lua

Liné1, regarding your question about mw.wikibase.getEntity() in Module:Wikidata4Bio (on my talkpage): I have little experience with LUA on commons, and am currently limited in time. I suggest you wait for other responses or ask the question elsewhere, for instance at d:Wikidata:Project chat. HenkvD (talk) 19:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)