Päivitä sisältösi

Taxonomic Swap 13601 (Tehty 26-12-2015)

HEADS UP: this swap has been partially reverted to try and stay aligned with Pelham (see comments below). It can't be fully reverted because it subsumed a superfamily into a family, and we can't really separate out records that *were* associated with the superfamily post-swap. So, please leave Hesperoidea in its active state, even though this swap was committed.

Also, please, PLEASE check http://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#policies before committing massive changes like this, or at least call in some other curators to get a couple more opinions.

Several additional recent papers have supported Hesperiidae being embedded within Papilionoidea (thus rendering Hesperioidea obsolete), including:
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/279/1731/1093
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1788/20140970
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/277/1695/2839.short
http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-9-280

This taxonomy has been adopted by BugGuide but not yet Pelham's US/Canada butterfly catalogue (I emailed about it but have not heard back yet).

Order Lepidoptera Linnaeus, 1758. In:... (Viittaus)
Kyllä
Lisännyt nlblock joulukuu 24, 2015 11:04 IP. | Tallentanut nlblock joulukuu 26, 2015
korvattu seuraavalla:

Kommentit

interesting - @kueda did you know about this?

Lähettänyt loarie yli 8 vuotta sitten

Ugh, I didn't know, but this violates our policy of following Pelham. @nlblock, please read http://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#policies and abide by the policies. If you cannot, we will revoke your curator privileges.

Lähettänyt kueda yli 8 vuotta sitten

I sincerely apologize! This followed someone else moving Hesperiidae into Papilionoidea, leaving Hesperioidea stranded with nothing underneath it. I thought it made sense to make this swap because of that. I should have just noted that the move of Hesperiidae didn't follow the Pelham policy and left it at that. Sorry for mucking things up.

Lähettänyt nlblock yli 8 vuotta sitten

If you notice something like that switch in the future, please just let us know about it. We don't police taxonomic changes as aggressively as we should, but at least we can talk about these issues if we know about them.

Lähettänyt kueda yli 8 vuotta sitten

Will do. Should I move things back to match Pelham?

Lähettänyt nlblock yli 8 vuotta sitten

I apologize again for inadvertently being a pain in the ass. It's the last thing I want to be on iNat (particularly because I think the butterfly taxonomy policy is excellent!). I feel really guilty about this.

Lähettänyt nlblock yli 8 vuotta sitten

I guess we can move Hesperiidae back under Hesperoidea without any damage. Any opinion, Scott?

Lähettänyt kueda yli 8 vuotta sitten

I don't have an opinion, this is a fairly painless one to toggle back and forth. I don't have strong feelings either way

Lähettänyt loarie yli 8 vuotta sitten

I got a complaint by someone with a 'must be in Papilionoidea' rule about skippers mixed in, and looks like Pelham still treats Hesperoidea as its own superfamily so I finally got around to reverting this. Hope thats cool with everyone

Lähettänyt loarie noin 8 vuotta sitten

hmm - and someone re-reverted it? What happened here?

Lähettänyt loarie noin 8 vuotta sitten

Sorry, changed the is_active status on Hesperoidea because I thought this had been committed and I forgot about this discussion. Adding some text to the description to make sure I don't do that again...

Lähettänyt kueda noin 8 vuotta sitten

@hugoalvarezg I saw you moved Hesperidae from Hesperoidea to Papilionoidea - see above - we're still going with the treatment of Hesperidae in Hesperoidea at the moment so I moved it back

Lähettänyt loarie noin 8 vuotta sitten

Lisää kommentti

Kirjaudu sisään tai Rekisteröidy lisätäksesi kommentteja
iNaturalist-verkoston jäsen   |   Palvelun tarjoaa avoimen lähdekoodin iNaturalist-ohjelmisto |   Dokumentaatio kehittäjille