Taxacom: a class of errors in Worms (and similar databases)

[Mikhail Daneliya]

You are making great contribution. Thank you very much! I hope those who
should hear you will hear.
Sincerely,
Mikhail


On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, 09:50 Erikjan Rijkers, <er at xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Op 2/24/25 om 07:20 schreef Mikhail Daneliya:
> > Thank you!
> > There are mistakes in taxonomic publications as well, abundant. It is
> just
> > normal to err. So, the best practice is you noticed a mistake, write to
> the
> > subject editor in WORMS. It is their constant dedication to correct such
> > mistakes.
>
> I understand your point, of course, but in the case of a whole *class*
> of errors I don't agree. These should not be addressed piecemeal but
> wholesale.
>
> My email to TAXACOM should be regarded as addressed to all
> above-mentioned subject editors - and not just in WORMS. You say it's
> normal to err, which only sounds fair enough.  It's carelessness that
> allows such simple validation errors to exist in any database.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erikjan
>
> > Sincerely,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > On Mon, 24 Feb 2025, 07:50 Erikjan Rijkers via Taxacom, <
> > taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Op 2/24/25 om 00:06 schreef Geoff Read:
> >>> perhaps not a good example of the general situation in a database
> >>
> >> Perhaps - but it's not exactly an accidental error:
> >>
> >> Of the names in the GBIF backbone file (admittedly from 202308) which
> >> has 2,614,593 accepted species names (in 268,274 genera), there is more
> >> than 1 % erroneously unparenthesized.
> >>
> >>   From GBIF name records that have status='ACCEPTED':
> >>
> >> [...]
> >> Zygopleura Koken, 1892  | Zygopleura plebia Herrick, 1887
> >> Zygosoma Labbé, 1899    | Zygosoma gibbosum Greeff, 1880
> >> Zygota Förster, 1856    | Zygota congener Zetterstedt, 1840
> >> Zynodes Whalley, 1970   | Zynodes strigerella Hampson, 1903
> >> Zyzzyva T.L.Casey, 1922 | Zyzzyva squamosa C.H.Boheman, 1844
> >> (28836 rows)
> >>
> >> The 'accepted' names from checklistbank.org (from 202502) are 0.5%
> >> erroneously unparenthesized (~13,000 names).
> >>
> >>>
> >>> In WoRMS I think a general search for instances of lack of parenthesis
> >> where there is a younger genus name requires the WoRMS database
> managers to
> >> do the search. Editors & users don't have the complex search capability
> to
> >> find the mismatches.
> >>>
> >>> So, as Mark Costello suggested, an approach to the WoRMS data team to
> >> investigate for other instances would be a great idea.
> >>
> >> Surely the biologists/curators (who I would expect might be on TAXACOM)
> >> should instruct their own technical people.
> >>
> >> Erikjan
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> >> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>