Talk:Bruguiera
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Seems unusual to have species synonyms listed on the genera page[edit]
As the topic line above says, it seems unusual. I am ambivalent about this, on the one hand it means that if it makes it easier for a user to find the taxa the ultimately are wanting info on, on the other hand, "search" does this as well. What do people think? Brunswicknic (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants, there was the following:
- I see no objection to including the information, but the simple listing makes it difficult to determine the number of species from that section. And as some synonyms are redirected there appear to be more species articles. It would be better to list the six species and give the synonyms indented below each or as a separate list. — Jts1882 | talk 11:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- I reorganised the list and self reverted to illustrate a different arrangement, see here. The repetitive "synonym of ..." text could be replaced by synonyms on a single line. Whatever the decision I think the current list should go, reorganised with synonyms or replaced by a simple species list. — Jts1882 | talk 14:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- Jts1882, lovely work, yes that alternative is great, shows the accepted species clearly, but allows users who have come across superseded names (which occurs in much literature, particularly in the Majority World) to see where they need to go to find info. It would be hard for a speciose taxa, Eucalyptus, Acacia for instance, but in this case it is not too much. Amongst the help for users, it recognises the work of the previous editors. Thanks. Brunswicknic (talk) 07:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- I am going to publish the edit of — Jts1882 | talk , as I think it is an elegant solution. If somebody else wants something different, that's Wikipedia. Brunswicknic (talk) 07:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- Jts1882, lovely work, yes that alternative is great, shows the accepted species clearly, but allows users who have come across superseded names (which occurs in much literature, particularly in the Majority World) to see where they need to go to find info. It would be hard for a speciose taxa, Eucalyptus, Acacia for instance, but in this case it is not too much. Amongst the help for users, it recognises the work of the previous editors. Thanks. Brunswicknic (talk) 07:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- I reorganised the list and self reverted to illustrate a different arrangement, see here. The repetitive "synonym of ..." text could be replaced by synonyms on a single line. Whatever the decision I think the current list should go, reorganised with synonyms or replaced by a simple species list. — Jts1882 | talk 14:39, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- I see no objection to including the information, but the simple listing makes it difficult to determine the number of species from that section. And as some synonyms are redirected there appear to be more species articles. It would be better to list the six species and give the synonyms indented below each or as a separate list. — Jts1882 | talk 11:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)