Talk:Xanthopan

West Africa?

"from West Africa (Rhodesia, Nyasaland) and Madagascar"... this should surely be "East Africa (...) and Madagascar"? Rhodesia and Nyasaland aren't nowhere near the western coast, even less in the area defined by our article on West Africa. – Haltiamieli (talk) 13:43, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Rolled up

It would be great if this article had an image of the proboscis rolled up a la [1]. Hyacinth (talk) 00:37, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Xanthopan morgani. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120229092937/http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/images/darwinsmoth_optimised.pdf to http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/images/darwinsmoth_optimised.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 18 May 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: MOVED to Xanthopan, per discussion below. Hadal (talk) 18:31, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

---

Xanthopan morgani → Xanthopan morganii – For the orthography of the name, a reference was made to Funet, where indeed the spelling "morgani" was found. Funet however is not a reliable source when it comes to orthography. In a case like this one, the spelling in the protologue is decisive, see ICZN Art. 33.4. I added in the article a link to the protologue, where the original spelling is found as "Morganii" (an initial capital in the specific epithet is to be changed into lower case). For convenience, I repeat the link here: List of the Specimens of Lepidopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum 8: 206. The original combination was Macrosila morganii; the species was transferred to the genus Xanthopan by Rothschild & Jordan in 1903.  Wikiklaas  21:14, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

• Move to Xanthopan. Per WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA, the genus title should be used for an article that covers a monotypic genus and its only species. The binomial should be spelled Xanthopan morganii in the article per evidence given by nominator. Plantdrew (talk) 20:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I oppose this suggestion. This would probably be a wise thing to do if taxonomy were treated as a status quo, which in fact it is not, and the first concern is to have the title of this page spelled correctly. The fact that a genus is monotypic right now doesn't mean it will stay that way forever. Even the time when people thought that most of the natural diversity had already been described is way behind us, so please let us just consider the correct name of this species.  Wikiklaas  20:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Taxonomy isn't static, but there's no more reason to suppose that additional species of Xanthopan will be described in the future than there is to suppose that X. morganii will not be transferred to a different genus. We can't choose titles for taxa based on vague speculation about future circumscriptions. The situation now is that the genus and the species are effectively the same subject; there's very little that can be said about one that can't be said about the other, and English Wikipedia doesn't have separate articles on the genus and the species in these situations. Personally, I wish the decision had been made to treat the monotypic genus at the binomial title, but that's not what happened. There are thousands of articles where binomial redirects to monotypic genus; see Category:Redirects to monotypic taxa. Wikipedias in other languages have chosen different solutions to the issues presented by monotypic taxa. Plantdrew (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Support alternative, move to Xanthopan. The guideline is quite right in this instance (they normally are), this is the best way to present the topic to a general audience. Andrewa (talk) 22:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
    • I can live with the suggested alternative, as long as the incorrect spelling "morgani" will disappear. Can an administrater move the page now?  Wikiklaas  09:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

New species identified

Recent studies makes Xanthopan praedicta a new species. So Xanthopan is no longer monogeneric.--Vinayaraj (talk) 09:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)