Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2019 April 3

= April 3 =

International Renaming of Birds
I was told recently (1 or 2 years ago), that there is a project to rename many birds worldwide. The rationale being that a bird known as X in Southern Africa is called Y in Northern Europe, yet it is the same bird. Examples being, the Crowned Plover. If we have an article on this I would like to read it. Please direct. This then also brings into question the featured article from today being in relation to the killdeer (Charadrius vociferus) and I ask if this "Plover" should not be a lapwing as I heard that all Plovers were being renamed as Lapwings. Is the Latin name for these birds being changed too, or is this just the common name? How will this be implemented as the "Mossie" in South Africa will always be referred to as such despite what some European committee decrees. Also if there are other such projects for renaming international "things" I would be curious to view these articles too. Thank you
 * This might be of interest: & Wikipedia article: Birds of the World: Recommended English Names —2606:A000:1126:28D:308B:FF55:D083:D699 (talk) 16:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * How dull. It's always bugged me that birds often get saddled with boring-ass names like grey jay when much more colourful native names abound (in this case, whiskey jack) which in many cases were in widespread use before some yawn enthusiast forced the change. I'd bet anything that the folks of New Guinea had a perfectly good and infinitely more interesting name for the "Lesser bird-of-paradise". Matt Deres (talk) 19:10, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I've always enjoyed a White-throated swallow. -- Jayron 32 18:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I prefer the Golden-throat swallow myself. —2606:A000:1126:28D:308B:FF55:D083:D699 (talk) 21:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Latin names usually only get changed if a species or genus was mistakenly named twice (e.g. if what were thought to be two different animals turn out to be the same), in which case the first used name replaces the newer name; or if what was thought to be one species or genus turns out to be two (or more), in which new names are created; or a species was assigned to the wrong genus, in which case the generic name will change but the specific name stays the same, e.g. Carcharodon megalodon becoming Carcharocles megalodon. A species should only have one Latin name, but its common for a species to have multiple common names (and for common names to apply to more than one species, e.g. the "robin" is a completely different bird in Europe and America.  Although according to the link that was posted, it seems that there is a plan to have a single common name for each bird, which sounds to me to be both impossibly ambitions and also rather domineering.  Iapetus (talk) 08:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * These are probably the same geniuses that took Brontosaurus away from us. Or tried to. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Let me repeat the statement above, because you seem to have missed it. "Latin names usually only get changed if a species or genus was mistakenly named twice".  For a time, it was thought that Brontosaurus had been named twice, the earliest name always takes precedence, in this case Apatosaurus was already used for that same genus of dinosaurs.  It didn't need two names for the same genus.  Interestingly, in 2015, a re-evaluation determined that some species classified as Apatosaurus may fit into a different genus instead, and the Brontosaurus genus was revived.  -- Jayron 32 18:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * How generous of them. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:04, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * "the earliest name always takes precedence" Generally true, but not necessarily. There are minimum standards as to what counts as "published" and names that appeared once without attracting any attention may be suppressed if a later name has become well known. With an absolutely strict "first takes precedence" policy, Megalosaurus would be Scrotum humanum.--Khajidha (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * True, but given that isn't relevant to Apatosaurus, I'm not sure why it needs emphasizing here. The correct name, according to the standards, was not Brontosaurus, at least under the rules of the time.  Names do change as more evidence comes forward as to what the correct names should be and we don't know everything at all times in history, which is why the Brontosaurus name was reinstated for some of the specimens.  Things we are told as children do not stay the same forever. -- Jayron 32 12:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

an edit question to an image
I posted the question at the file talk. But I'm not sure if I should use the current tv studio's name? For the item Studio. If the studio was bought by another, but the old studio's name currently has a past list of productions. That they were part of. Tainted-wingsz (talk) 19:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Since this relates to editing Wikipedia, you might have better luck over at WP:Help desk. I have done similar edits, and what I did is use the contemporary (previous) name in the parameter pipe-linked to the current-named article (unless there already is a redirect). —2606:A000:1126:28D:F935:C7E2:FE1:E49 (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * (To the question about the redirect page/ article.) Earlier, the page/ article is now using it's current name. In March 2019, a page move happened to the new company's name, but on the other day it was moved back.
 * (If I wasn't clear about the top question, I'm expanding it to a version that is used in a movie/ film scenario.) An easier version; You have a movie/ film company, Warner Bros. and under their belt (subsidiary) is New Line Cinema. And the picture/ image was from New Line Cinema, but the one that made it was a freelance contractor/ artist. That owns an indie art studio. And at the time I wasn't sure to use the name to the art studio or New Line Cinema? But the art studio was going to be sold to a company. Which will present a third company or party that owns the license. Or if the company decides not to re-name it. (And this just made me felt confused. Or I'm I making this sound confusing?) Tainted-wingsz (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The way it is on the file page seems fine. Sunrise Beyond is a redirect to Xebec (studio) where the name change is explained. I'm fairly certain that   refers to the film studio, not the art studio for the image -- but WP:Help desk might provide a definitive answer. —2606:A000:1126:28D:F935:C7E2:FE1:E49 (talk) 00:48, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Not until earlier, my question is answered. If Xebec (studio) didn't gone with a page move. And it made me confused, for which name to use. Keep Sunrise Beyond alone or change it to Xebec? Then recently Xebec will be broken up and well? Until then is the item "studio" have to be changed again? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 02:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Assuming Sunrise Beyond was the name when the anime was made, use that -- what happens after that is immaterial to the file description, hopefully, page moves, redirects, etc. will sort out eventually. —2606:A000:1126:28D:F935:C7E2:FE1:E49 (talk) 03:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)


 * No, the tv show was from July 2018 to September 2018. Then the studio was sold to, brought by, etc. About two months later. (In November 2018.) Tainted-wingsz (talk) 03:12, 9 April 2019 (UTC)