Talk:Cylix tupareomanaia

Fishes Low‑importance

	Fish portal This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Cylix tupareomanaia be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Moving page to name of genus

@Schwede66: I am working on this article after the topic was featured on Critter of the Week. It is a monotypic genus (ie only one species is known. The newly named species has been given the genus name Cylix, the Greek or Latin word for cup. User:Giantflightlessbirds has just confirmed to me that because it is monotypic the page Cylix tupareomanaia should be moved to the genus name: Cylix

The problem is that there is an existing redirect set up for Cylix, going to Kylix - an article about ancient cups. See also: Cylix of Apollo.

I am a bit unsure how to progress this. I don't think the page should be moved over the redirect. I guess the genus page name could be Cylix (genus). What do you think ? Are there other options ? Marshelec (talk) 05:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, since cylix is just an alternate spelling of kylix, but is the actual name of the genus, I think the genus should occupy that spot, with a hatnote pointing people to the kylix article, and there should be a disambiguation page for kylix/cylix. The latter two things already exist, so it's down to moving the genus page over the redirect. Just my thoughts. Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 07:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Move the redirect out of the way (e.g. Cylix (cup)). Then tidy up any incoming links. Then move the genus to the primary name. Then give that article a hatnote. Schwede 66 10:15, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had feedback from WP:Requested moves/Technical requests on this point. Articles about monotypic fauna are given the title of the genus as per WP:MONOTYPICFAUNA but, "[t]he exception is when a monotypic genus name needs to be disambiguated. The article should then be at the species, since this is a more natural form of disambiguation.". If a case can be made that Cylix (the genus) meets the test of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then a standard requested move could be initiated. I will leave the article title as-is for now.Marshelec (talk) 00:48, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]