Template talk:Automatic taxobox

This talkpage has been used for general discussion of issues with the automated taxobox system as a whole – taxobox templates like {{Speciesbox}} or this one, taxonomy templates like Template:Taxonomy/Aves, or the design and coding of the system. It is suggested that these should now be discussed at WT:Automated taxobox system, and this page reserved for specific problems with this template.

Any chance of writing Template:Automatic taxobox for kowiki

It would be great if this could be available in kowiki and if it could work using both English and Hangul parameters. Taxa, both animals and plants, are somewhat underrepresented in kowiki. I believe creating this in Hangul (& English) would make kowiki articles on taxa far easier to write, just as they make writing taxon articles easy in enwiki. MargaretRDonald (talk) 03:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

The automated taxobox templates could be transferred to any Wiki relatively easily . However, the system relies on the taxonomy templates for the hierarchy, so you'd also need something like 30,000 taxonomy templates (might be 119k), which makes transferring the system rather onerous.  —  Jts1882 | talk  10:07, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

In the last few days I've received several hundred notifications about taxonomy templates I've created being linked to Wikidata. This is because there is a bot that is translating/copying templates for Serbian Wikipedia. Previously I have been flooded with notifications for taxonomy templates being created on Chinese Wikipedia. Plantdrew (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

I haven't received those notices but have wondered why Wikidata needs such templates. Some are being copied to other Wikipedias. For instance the Maori wiki has the templates for the full taxonomy of Panthera (see here), along with the relevant support templates and modules to display them, even though it has no articles at any of the taxa.  —  Jts1882 | talk  17:10, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Turns out the automatic taxobox and speciesbox are functional there. I did a test in the editor at mi:Taika. User Ultron90 seems responsible for the copying. Perhaps they have a better idea what is involved.  —  Jts1882 | talk  17:17, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello. The templates just involve a lot of copypasting based on what is needed for a specific article. I'm not well-versed in the coding to understand most of it, but I understand enough to know what to copy to another wiki. In regards to kowiki, I checked and the automatic taxobox already exists there (connected to this very template on wikidata) but it just hasn't been updated to the same level as enwiki. I could copypaste the latest version from enwiki to kowiki, but a dedicated person is needed to translate the parts of the code that gets displayed. Generally the parameters should be in the respective languages, but the coding can stay in English for compatibility with the content translation tool and the documentation for the parameters can be tailored to the interface language of each user. @MargaretRDonald if you want the kowiki template updated, you need to get a native contributor from kowiki to help if you don't already understand Korean. If there is a person willing to help but doesn't understand the coding, just tell them to contact or email me and we'll work something out. Ultron90 (talk) 19:12, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Ultron90:, @Plantdrew: and @Jts1882:.

The full taxonomy for Panthera has been generated by:

{{Don't edit this line {{{machine code|}}} |rank=genus |link=Panthera |parent=Pantherinae }}, as one would hope. @Jjw: at kowiki to may be able to find someone to work with @Ultron90: to update the templates and work on the translations where necessary. It would be great also if someone could write some bots for kowiki... MargaretRDonald (talk) 20:50, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

How to deal with existing articles that are of synonyms?

I was just about to convert Dysgraphhadena to use {{automatic taxobox}} instead of {{taxobox}}, but while investigating I discovered that Dysgraphhadena is apparently a junior synonym of Rhiza. This was unmentioned on both pages. So, I added the synonym to Rhiza's page, but I'm not sure what is supposed to be done with Dysgraphhadena's. Should it be replaced with a redirect to Rhiza? Should it just be deleted entirely? Should it be largely left as is but with text added mentioning that it's a synonym? If it's left in place (and not made into a redirect), should anything special be done to its taxobox? Or something else entirely? - Rwv37 (talk) 21:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

@Rwv37: in this case I would simply make it into a redirect; there's no useful information in the article that needs to be merged into Rhiza. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

OK, I did that, and in the process discovered there's actually a specific rcat template intended for this: {{R from alternative scientific name}}. Thank you! - Rwv37 (talk) 08:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Rwv37: indeed. Where there is any substantial history of editing the redirected article, you can also add {{R with history}}, but it's not necessary in this case in my view. There is a need for more guidance on dealing with articles found to be at synonyms. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)