Talk:Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca)/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>DavidGoodman (current practice) |
imported>John Stephenson (Discussion on cz-biology; booting out the brown-and-white bear?) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
::Quick check of current practice in the use of scientific and common names in the real world. | ::Quick check of current practice in the use of scientific and common names in the real world. | ||
:::Looking at the title of articles listed in Biological abstracts , | :::Looking at the title of articles listed in Biological abstracts , there are 150 instances of Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). 181 of just Giant pandas, 3 of just Ailuropoda melanoleuca, and zero of Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda) | ||
there are 150 instances of Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). 181 | :::Obviously, the use inside article will be more varied. But I think this demonstrates that the present Citizendium title, "Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda)" is unique to Citizendium and not the practice in any other context. [[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]] 09:48, 25 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
of just Giant pandas, 3 of just Ailuropoda melanoleuca, and zero of | |||
Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda) | ::::See the thread on the cz-biology list [http://mail.citizendium.org/pipermail/cz-biology/2007-October/000035.html starting here]. As stated there, one problem with renaming the Giant Panda article like this is that it implies exclusion of the other (sub)species of Giant Panda, ''A. melanoleuca qinlingensis'' (a brown-and-white bear). The article would probably need to be rewritten to reflect that, because it was originally written as an introduction to giant pandas generally. I think, basically, that using precise scientific terms makes the whole thing too specific. [[Giant panda]] is a better starting point in this case. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 22:23, 25 October 2007 (CDT) | ||
:::Obviously, the use inside article will be more varied. But I think this demonstrates that the present Citizendium title, | |||
"Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda)" is unique to Citizendium and not the practice in any other context. [[User:DavidGoodman|DavidGoodman]] 09:48, 25 October 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 21:23, 25 October 2007
Image
Nice find! Stephen Ewen 23:40, 17 May 2007 (CDT)
Article title
Kim, this kind of major move really needs to be discussed in advance. I also don't see how this new title respects CZ's naming conventions ("prefer common names"). Unless this is some decision within the Biology Workgroup? John Stephenson 21:35, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
- Please, see the discussion at the Bioloy workgroup talk page. 21:46, 24 October 2007 (CDT)
- Quick check of current practice in the use of scientific and common names in the real world.
- Looking at the title of articles listed in Biological abstracts , there are 150 instances of Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). 181 of just Giant pandas, 3 of just Ailuropoda melanoleuca, and zero of Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda)
- Obviously, the use inside article will be more varied. But I think this demonstrates that the present Citizendium title, "Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant Panda)" is unique to Citizendium and not the practice in any other context. DavidGoodman 09:48, 25 October 2007 (CDT)
- Quick check of current practice in the use of scientific and common names in the real world.
- See the thread on the cz-biology list starting here. As stated there, one problem with renaming the Giant Panda article like this is that it implies exclusion of the other (sub)species of Giant Panda, A. melanoleuca qinlingensis (a brown-and-white bear). The article would probably need to be rewritten to reflect that, because it was originally written as an introduction to giant pandas generally. I think, basically, that using precise scientific terms makes the whole thing too specific. Giant panda is a better starting point in this case. John Stephenson 22:23, 25 October 2007 (CDT)