Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spiders

message: Hi I've been working on an article on spider vision since I noticed that we didn't have one. I'd appreciate any help improving it! The draft can be found here. I've submitted it for review but there's still a lot that needs improvement, especially the lead and evolution sections. ThatSpiderByte (talk) 19:01, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: nice work! Peter coxhead (talk) 08:25, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

text: those kind of spiders have a very special vision. 3 to 6 times more visual field Tachito420 (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spider vision article 

message: Siamspinops garoensis has a description section that I suspect was copied verbatim from the source. Does anybody have access to Zootaxa who can confirm?  Plantdrew (talk) 21:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ah, the value of Swiss copyright law is that the World Spider Catalog has a copy accessible to anyone that registers with them (free). Your suspicion was correct, it was directly copied. I removed it. (I seem to recall that I should ask for the history to be removed too, but haven't.) Peter coxhead (talk) 16:35, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Siamspinops garoensis'' copyright? 

message: Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a  parameter to , which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to , and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass  a new  parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello project members! Note that per WP:PIQA, all the class ratings are being harmonised across different WikiProjects so we need to remove any non-standard classes like SIA-class from your banner. Would you like to automatically classify these as List-class or Disambig-class perhaps? Alternatively it could just be removed and then the 23 articles in :Category:SIA-Class Spiders articles would become "unassessed" or just inherit the class from other projects. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: SIA will now classify as List-class. Banner has been converted to standard scale. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  so are the restrictions on list class articles now lifted? The point of SIA-class is that articles can have multiple wikilinks per line, images, references, etc. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing has changed with the articles, only their assessments. Numerous people have confirmed that SIAs are a subset of lists, so this seems an accurate assessment, unless you have a better idea? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:16, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project-independent quality assessments 

message: As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej (talk) 17:41, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credibility bot 

message: Members of this WikiProject might be interested in the requested move discussion happening at Talk:Chrysanthus Janssen#Requested move 24 September 2023. Thank you for any feedback at that talk page! Umimmak (talk) 01:52, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion is now between Chrysanthus (arachnologist) and Father Chrysanthus as possible article titles. Thank you again for any additional comments in that requested move discussion. Umimmak (talk) 07:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move discussion: Chrysanthus Janssen --> Chrysanthus (arachnologist) 

message: Hi,
This book https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349297445_A_Field_Guide_to_the_Spider_Genera_of_India has been made publicly accessible by the author. It has some information for many genera whose Wikipedia articles are tiny, specially behavioral and ecological topics that are severely lacking. We can collectively work through this book to expand all these articles, where possible.
JackTheCritter (talk) 19:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A resource for article expansion 

message: The World Spider Catalog now recognizes Heptathelidae as distinct from Liphistiidae. I've made a quick stub at Heptathelidae. I've also revised the opening of Liphistiidae, but it needs a lot of work, because much of the material now belongs in Heptathelidae. I don't have much time at present, so I hope there's someone else who can work on this. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liphistiidae and Heptathelidae 

message: The World Spider Catalog revised Grammostola porteri as a junior synonym of Grammostola rosea in 2022. I've updated the latter's page to reflect this, but I'm not sure how to proceed with the former's, deletion and redirect? Benjappel (talk) 16:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: there was no useful referenced material at this version of Grammostola porteri so just converting to a redirect seems correct to me, and is what I have done. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammostola porteri no longer a separate species