This Month in GLAM: January 2024 edit

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

WikiProject Tree of Life Newsletter Issue 26 edit

 
January and February 2024—Issue 026


Tree of Life


Welcome to the Tree of Life newsletter!
Newly recognized content

  Alpine ibex by LittleJerry
  Markham's storm petrel by FunkMonk, Jens Lallensack, and Therapyisgood
  List of primates by PresN
  List of birds of Alberta by grungaloo
  Rice by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by RecycledPixels
  Barley by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Bruxton
  Chicken by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by DocZach
  Cereal by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by Bruxton
  Ant mimicry by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by AryKun
  Anopheles by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by AryKun
  Mosquito by Chiswick Chap, reviewed by 20 upper
  Cherry blossom by Reconrabbit, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Sei whale by 20 upper, reviewed by grungaloo
  Megaherbivore by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Brown bear by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Indian rhinoceros by 20 upper, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Hypericum hircinum by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by grungaloo
  Hypericum foliosum by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Hypericum grandifolium by Fritzmann2002, reviewed by Esculenta
  Boquila by Etriusus, reviewed by Chiswick Chap
  Aptostichus barackobamai by Etriusus, reviewed by Esculenta
  Crassispira incrassata by Etriusus, reviewed by 20 upper
  Punctelia by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
  Chrysothrix chlorina by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
  Chrysothrix chlorina by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
  Ramalina peruviana by Esculenta, reviewed by Ealdgyth
  Menemerus animatus by simongraham, reviewed by Esculenta
  Afraflacilla braunsi by simongraham, reviewed by grungaloo
  Nasutoceratops by FunkMonk, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Pseudastacus by Olmagon, reviewed by FunkMonk
  Angustidontus by Super Dromaeosaurus and Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Amitchell125
  Pruemopterus by Super Dromaeosaurus and Ichthyovenator, reviewed by Etriusus
  Black-billed magpie by grungaloo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Black-capped chickadee by grungaloo, reviewed by Jens Lallensack
  Horned sungem by Jens Lallensack, reviewed by grungaloo
  Flaco (owl) by Rhododendrites, reviewed by Etriusus
  Telonemia by Snotoleks, reviewed by Esculenta
  "Pliosaurus" andrewsi by Amirani1746, reviewed by grungaloo
  Beaver drop by Lightburst, reviewed by Chiswick Chap

Newly nominated content

  Horned sungem by Jens Lallensack
  Tufted jay by grungaloo
  Nasutoceratops by FunkMonk
  Maize by Chiswick Chap
  Cattle by Chiswick Chap
  Pig by Chiswick Chap
  Domestic duck by Chiswick Chap
  Eusociality by Chiswick Chap
  Fish by Chiswick Chap
  Barnacle by Chiswick Chap
  Ochrophyte by Snotoleks
  Parvilucifera by Snotoleks
  Thalattoarchon by Amirani1746
  Hydropunctaria amphibia by Esculenta
  Melanohalea by Esculenta
  Spot test (lichen) by Esculenta
  Lecideaceae by Esculenta
  Hypericum × inodorum by Fritzmann2002
  Hypericum sect. Androsaemum by Fritzmann2002
  Olga Hartman by Viriditas
  Mixtotherium by PrimalMustelid
  Enhydriodon by PrimalMustelid
  Lentinus brumalis by Зэгс ус

  Discuss this issue

You are receiving this because you added your name to the subscribers list of the WikiProject Tree of Life. If you no longer wish to receive the newsletter, please remove your name.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

List of Russula species edit

Can you point me to the policy and/or guideline to support your contentious claim that the use of more than 1000 red links in a single article is correct? — Isaidnoway (talk) 00:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Isaidnoway, each red-link in the article is unique. Each red-link points to a notable subject that could conceivably be developed into an article. The magnitude of the total red-links in the list article only reflects the highly speciose nature of the genus and not any mis-application of the use of red-links. As an experienced editor, I am sure you are already familiar with WP:RED and do not need to place templated tags on list articles suggesting that they "may" need cleanup. 'Cheers, Loopy30 (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Per WP:REDLINK — Add red links to articles to indicate that a page will be created soon. I did a check and found 30+ red links that are 14 years old, and then 300+ red links that are 11 years old. That length of time does not equate to created soon. And fast forward to 2024 and now there are over 1000 red links. So yes, they may need clean up per the advice at Template:Cleanup red links. So I will be placing the cleanup tag back in the article. As an experienced editor, I am sure you already know that placing a cleanup tag in an article puts it into a category where other editors can see it, and then they can help with improving the article, you've heard of many hands make light work. And per the instructions at maintenance template removalIt is not okay to remove maintenance templates until the issue flagged by the template is remedied first. Thanks for your cooperation in this matter. Isaidnoway (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
WP:REDLINK doesn't say use redlinks only if the article will be created soon. It says if they "will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable". The latter applies to species articles. WP:REDLINK also says "remove red links if and only if Wikipedia should not have any coverage on the subject". —  Jts1882 | talk  13:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The full sentence you refer to in WP:REDLINK is "Add red links to articles to indicate that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic because the subject is notable and verifiable." - the latter clause is what applies here.
For the first clause, completion of Wikipedia does not have a deadline. Even if over 90% of these red-linked topics are likely to never be completed within our lifetimes, it is still correct to red-link them. Unlike a regular article, the use of many red links in a list article does not interrupt or impair the reading as it would do in a block of text. In a genus list article, the species links are navigational aids to the species articles once they are created. The red colour also helps in allowing readers and editors assess which articles already exist.
In this case, the addition of the maintenance tag was not warranted as the only "maintenance" that could be done would be the generation of new species-level articles, something which is best done deliberately and not in the mass-generation of one-line stubs devoid of any further detail. Placing the tag on the list article was incorrect as there is no further maintenance needed to the article. Removal of these red-links would be detrimental to the article.
Since you boldly added the tag, and I subsequently reverted this addition, now is the time to discuss the validity of your edit before you decide to add it back. A wider discussion on the article talk page may be necessary to gain consensus for any eventual change.
Loopy30 (talk) 15:15, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I have opened a discussion on the article's talk page. Notifying Jts1882 as well, since he they replied here. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
I shouldn't have assumed that Jts1882s pronouns are he/him and I apologize for that. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

This Month in GLAM: February 2024 edit

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

This Month in GLAM: March 2024 edit

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.