Cunc, I don't think we need to get out the firehoses here.
I am 100% certain that Mav has *not* been wasting his time here. He is as good a Wikipedian as anyone could reasonably ask for. He has argued his case clearly and respectfully. I have no beef with Mav, nor with that question of his.
It is equally true that the people who ARE doing the hard yards in the fauna entries are NOT the ones who keep interfering with them. Everyone working in the area knows perfectly well that species names are capitalised, and we have all run afoul of the hit and run edits of the people who (although undoubtedly sincere and meaning well) are NOT working in the area, and often have no expertise in it. Neither Mav nor I have got personal about this disagreement, nor do I think it likey that either of us will. Tony Wilson (Tannin)
They don't *need* to be capitalised, that's just the international convention. If someone went out and said" Instead of writing species as Genus species, I'll write it as GeNuS sPeCiEs" he wouldn't be wrong, but it's not the convention. We should use the typical conventions of the world. I personally think Wikipedia should try to use mostly metric measurments, only American for clarification, because that's what almost all of the world uses.
--- Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
Tony Wilson wrote:
Everyone working in the area knows perfectly well that
species names are
capitalised,
Arrogant sophistry!
This is the logical fallacy of [[Appeal to common practice]]
Ec
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com