User:Plantdrew/pinegoogletest

Pine googletests

Google result number for pine scientific/vernacular names. All searches were performed with -wikipedia as a search term. Reported results are the value given at the bottom of the last page of results (arrived at last page by entering "990" for Google's "start=" parameter). Bolded entries are vernacular names beating the scientific name, or the scientific name if unbeaten by vernacular names.

• "Pinus maximartinezii" 302
  • "Big cone pinyon" 69
  • "Martinez pinyon" 59
  • "maxipiñon" 42

• "Pinus cembroides" 421
  • "Mexican pinyon" 390
  • "Mexican nut pine" 104
  • "Mexican stone pine" 49

• "Pinus pinaster" 259
  • "Pinus pinaster" -"bark extract" 238
  • "Maritime pine" 336 (lots of results for a medicinal extract from the bark)
  • "Maritime pine" -"bark extract" 282 (still has results with just bark or extract though)
  • "Cluster pine" 409 (includes addresses on streets named "Cluster Pine")
  • "Cluster pine" -"bark extract" 417

• "Pinus durangensis" 362
  • "Durango pine" 482 (lots of irrelevant results though). Some English sources are using the ambiguous Spanish term "ocote"

• "Pinus merkusii" 337
  • "Sumatran pine" 347
  • "Merkus pine" 300
  • "Mindoro pine" 192

• "Pinus squamata" 320
  • "Qiaojia pine" 167

• "Pinus sibirica" 404
  • "Siberian pine" 305
  • "Siberian stone pine" 232

• "Pinus kesiya" 300
  • "Khasi pine" 358
  • "Benguet pine" 317
  • "Luzon pine" 125
  • "Khasia pine" 169

• "Pinus krempfii" 237
  • "Krempf's pine" 154

Dab term tables

23 March 2015

Project	(genus)	(projectname)	all pages with parenthetical disambiguator
Animal	10	8	95
Amphibians and reptiles	38	4 (amphibian or reptile)	145
Arthropods	63	3	141
Beetles	46	27	79
Birds	60	98	553
Bivalves	40	14	67
Cephalopods	3	4	20
Fishes	85	135	276
Gastropods	14	297	391
Insects	252	38	801
Lepidoptera	136	1067 (moth or butterfly)	1540
Mammals	31	4	196
Rodents	2	4	22
Spiders	22	101	144
Dinosaurs	1	25	44
Palaeontology	50	N/A	197
Marine life	17	N/A	64
Fungi	6	135	202
Plants	123	629	1667
Totals	999	2593	6644

Updated table 16 October 2018

Project	(genus)	(projectname)	all pages with parenthetical disambiguator
Animal	29	22	241
Amphibians and reptiles	53	9 (amphibian or reptile)	196
Arthropods	67	7	225
Beetles	85	167	271
Birds	75	198	704
Bivalves	0	60	75
Cephalopods	7	5	39
Fishes	95	161	326
Gastropods	8	367	451
Insects	225	87	1401
Lepidoptera	146	1120 (moth or butterfly)	1621
Mammals	43	11	236
Rodents	2	5	35
Spiders	33	257	310
Dinosaurs	0	18	38
Palaeontology	37	N/A	314
Marine life	27	N/A	149
Fungi	1	154	232
Plants	40	874	1999
Totals	973	3522	8863

A couple notes. These figures are quick and dirty. "Total" for a project is ALL parenthetically dabbed articles (including anatomical terms and biologists). For most projects, genera account for almost all of the total, but for plants, mammals and birds, there are a large number of breed/cultivars and individual domestic animals with a dab term. And the figures in common name column may include article that aren't on genera (e.g. Operculum (fish).

comment

Ambiguity of "(genus)" as a disambiguator should not be underestimated. The last time this came up for plants, I did some research. I looked at the first 60 (alphabetically) plant genera that had a parenthetical disambiguator of "(plant)" or "(genus)". 22 of 60 were already disambiguated against an animal genus on Wikipedia. Checking against GBIF and Worms, I found that 45 of the 60 plant genera had a corresponding animal genus published. Granted, that included some animal genera best treated as synonyms, but there were also recognized animal genera not yet on Wikipedia. At any rate, for the plants I looked at, "(genus)" is still too ambiguous in somewhere between 35%-75% of cases.

Are 35%+ of all plant genera ambiguous with animal genera? No. But many scientific names are constructed by slapping a Latinate suffix on non-Latin personal name (as in Gordonia, or by creating a Greco-Latinate compound that nobody would've recognized 2000 years ago (as in Actinopeltis). If these weird hybrid terms are ambiguous with anything it's almost always going to be another genus constructed using the same rules, and "(genus)" won't work to disambiguate. Then there are scientific names taken directly from a term that had meaning in classical Greek/Latin. Obviously, these are ambiguous from the start with the classical term, but "(genus)" might work to disambiguate these; at least as long as another biologist didn't also find the classical term evocative and appropriate it for another genus (as happened with Laelaps and Echidna (disambiguation)).

Going through WikiProject Arthropod tagged articles with [A-Za-z&quality=&importance=&score=&pagenameWC=on&limit=250&offset=1&sorta=Article+title&sortb=Quality this search], I found 132 articles that had a parenthetical disambiguatory term. 106 of these articles were on genera (the remainder being anatomical terms, biologists or taxa at ranks other than genus). 61 used "(genus)" as the dab term, and 45 used a different dab term (indeed, a horrifying mess of terms; a crab genus might be dabbed with "(crab)", "(arthropod)", "(crustacean)" or "(decapod)"). Of the 45 not using "(genus)", 31 can NOT use genus as there is already an article or redirect on Wikipedia for a different genus with the same name. Best case, if you try to standardize "(genus)" as the dab term for arthropods, you get 75 of 106 articles where it is sufficient to disambiguate. That doesn't strike me as especially consistent. If you go with "(animal)" it works in 99 of 106 cases; (animal) doesn't work for 2 articles where a genus is ambiguous with an anatomical feature in an animal, and 5 articles where there's an article or redirect for a homonymous animal genus (in two of these, there doesn't appear to be a replacement name yet for the junior homonym). If you go with "(arthropod)", it works in 101 of 106 cases (doesn't work for 1 genus/anatomy term ([[scutellum} and 4 homonymous genera that are arthropods in both uses (Battus, Cyclopyge, Harpagomorpha and Zalmoxis).

No one dab term is going to work 100% of the time. If you want the fewest number of dab terms covering the largest number of cases, (animal) is going to work far better than (genus). But (animal) is currently hardly used at all on Wikipedia and implementing it would require many moves. The current status quo is that across many organismal WikiProjects, most genera that need to be dabbed use the broadest common name(s) associated with the WikiProject's scope (e.g. fish, gastropod, etc.). The table below shows the current status quo.

Automatic taxobox usage by project

April 10 2017

Queried Petscan for WikiProject template on talk page and either "taxobox" (manual) or "automatic taxobox" and "speciesbox" (auto) on article page on 4/10/17. Total is via transclusion count of the template

Project	Auto	Manual	Percentage auto
Algae	74	1513	4.9
Amphibians and Reptiles	7165	6047	54.2
Animals	710	3445	17.1
Arthropods	226	5387	4.0
Beetles	2428	22709	9.6
Birds	599	12956	4.5
Bivalves	33	1263	2.5
Cephalopods	217	1024	17.5
Cetaceans	289	5	98.3
Dinosaurs	1130	264	81.1
Fishes	2194	17371	11.2
Fungi	118	11361	1.0
Gastropods	6224	23550	20.9
Insects	8406	45361	15.6
Lepidoptera	8232	85783	8.6
Mammals	1500	5189	22.4
Marine life	434	3870	10.1
Palaeontology	5078	6859	42.5
Plants	3333	54079	5.8
Primates	271	567	32.3
Rodents	148	2892	4.9
Sharks	25	705	3.4
Spiders	4623	2430	65.5
Turtles	126	509	19.8
Viruses	0	1380	0
Total	45860	302711	13.2

13 July 2017

Project	Auto	Manual	Percentage auto
Algae	78	1518	4.9
Amphibians and Reptiles	10473	2874	78.5
Animals	725	3451	17.4
Arthropods	249	5409	4.4
Beetles	2454	22835	9.8
Birds	3931	9688	28.9
Bivalves	34	1268	2.6
Cephalopods	241	1026	19.0
Cetaceans	299	5	98.4
Dinosaurs	1142	262	81.3
Fishes	2484	17273	12.6
Fungi	132	11419	1.1
Gastropods	6480	23528	21.6
Insects	10275	44128	18.9
Lepidoptera	10797	83350	11.5
Mammals	1981	4950	28.6
Marine life	441	3895	10.2
Microbiology	38	7230	0.1
Palaeontology	5448	6730	44.7
Plants	8850	49233	15.2
Primates	314	540	36.8
Rodents	419	2623	13.8
Sharks	33	699	4.5
Spiders	4964	2307	68.3
Turtles	138	497	21.7
Viruses	0	1388	0
Total	64017	287686	18.2

13 August 2017

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 10 April
Algae	99	1518	1617	6.1	25
Amphibians and Reptiles	10499	2860	13359	78.6	3334
Animals	728	3461	4189	17.4	18
Arthropods	286	5393	5679	5.0	60
Beetles	2460	22856	25316	9.7	32
Birds	4879	8741	13620	35.8	4280
Bivalves	72	1235	1307	5.5	39
Cephalopods	241	1026	1267	19.0	24
Cetaceans	302	6	308	98.1	13
Dinosaurs	1173	243	1416	82.8	43
Fishes	4539	15300	19839	22.9	2345
Fungi	143	11432	11575	1.2	25
Gastropods	6596	23475	30071	21.9	372
Insects	10343	44126	54469	19.0	1937
Lepidoptera	11626	82635	94261	12.3	3394
Mammals	2239	4711	6950	32.2	739
Marine life	495	3870	4365	11.3	61
Microbiology	36	7373	7409	0.5
Palaeontology	5563	6668	12231	45.5	485
Plants	11381	46912	58293	19.5	8048
Primates	320	539	859	37.3	49
Rodents	773	2274	3047	25.4	625
Sharks	145	592	737	19.7	120
Spiders	4983	2309	7292	68.3	360
Turtles	140	496	636	22.0	14
Viruses	0	1390	1390	0	0
Total	71283	281283	352566	20.2	25423

17 December 2017

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 15 August
Algae	339	1371	1710	19.8	240
Amphibians and Reptiles	10960	2699	13659	80.8	461
Animals	819	3512	4331	18.9	91
Arthropods	324	5468	5792	5.6	38
Beetles	2484	23091	25575	9.7	24
Birds	6041	7626	13667	44.2	1162
Bivalves	80	1236	1316	6.1	8
Cephalopods	284	1012	1296	21.9	43
Cetaceans	319	9	328	97.3	17
Dinosaurs	1225	206	1431	85.6	52
Fishes	7942	12172	20114	39.5	3403
Fungi	193	11497	11690	1.7	50
Gastropods	7024	23349	30373	23.1	428
Insects	10574	44660	55234	19.1	231
Lepidoptera	16201	78413	94614	17.1	4575
Mammals	2466	4556	7022	35.1	227
Marine life	661	3804	4465	14.8	166
Microbiology	60	7924	7984	0.8	24
Palaeontology	6139	6431	12570	48.8	576
Plants	18518	40573	59091	31.3	7137
Primates	327	538	865	37.8	7
Rodents	1457	1614	3071	47.4	684
Sharks	686	48	734	93.5	541
Spiders	5099	2290	7389	69.0	116
Turtles	152	491	643	23.6	12
Viruses	NA	1415	1415	NA	NA
Total	91067	266198	357265	25.5	19784

21 April 2018

I seem to have gotten into the schedule of running statistics on automatic taxobox usage every 4 months, so here is the latest update, one year in from when I begin tracking this (stats compiled April 15):

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 17 December	% increase since 10 April 2017
Algae	943	867	1810	52.1	604	44.2
Amphibians and Reptiles	11498	2471	13969	82.3	538	28.1
Animals	1752	3409	5161	33.9	933	16.8
Arthropods	819	5547	6366	12.9	495	8.9
Beetles	3929	23306	27235	14.4	1445	4.8
Birds	8411	5285	13696	61.4	2370	56.9
Bivalves	158	1164	1322	12.0	78	9.5
Cephalopods	856	652	1508	56.8	572	39.3
Cetaceans	342	5	347	98.6	23	0.3
Dinosaurs	1256	183	1439	87.3	31	6.2
Fishes	11141	9527	20668	53.9	3199	42.8
Fungi	324	11447	11771	2.8	131	1.8
Gastropods	7653	23067	30720	24.9	629	4.0
Insects	13182	44748	57930	22.8	2608	7.2
Lepidoptera	22409	73084	95493	23.5	6208	14.9
Mammals	2863	4281	7144	40.1	397	17.7
Marine life	1525	3116	4641	32.9	864	22.8
Microbiology	98	8508	8606	1.1	38	1.0
Palaeontology	6756	6336	13092	51.6	617	9.1
Plants	25428	35659	61087	41.6	6910	35.8
Primates	666	208	874	76.2	339	43.9
Rodents	1799	1271	3070	58.6	342	53.7
Sharks	696	46	742	93.8	10	90.4
Spiders	5252	2325	7577	69.3	153	3.8
Turtles	511	136	647	79.0	359	59.2
Viruses	NA	1428	1428	NA	NA	NA
Wikipedia	118347	247831	366178	32.3	27280	19.1

Commentary

Numbers for the individual projects are derived from searches for project banner templates on the talk page and the various manual/auto taxobox templates in the article. This searches for Amphibian and Reptiles articles with manual taxoboxes; modify the values under the Templates&links tab to run other searches. The Wikipedia line is derived from transclusion counts for the various taxobox templates (e.g. Taxobox), and doesn't take WikiProject banners into account. Some taxon articles have multiple WikiProject banners (most frequently with Palaeontology and something else) and are included in the count above for each WikiProject. Some taxon articles don't have any WikiProject banners; the Wikipedia line does catch these (most frequently these are weird protists and palaeontological animals).

Some highlights. In December, 5 WikiProjects used automatic taxoboxes in more than 50% of articles. Now 13 WikiProjects (of 26 tracked) are using automatic taxoboxes in the majority of articles. The 3 WikiProjects with the largest number of articles (Lepidoptera, Plants and Insects) each saw several thousand articles converted to automatic taxoboxes. Overall, almost 1/3 of taxon articles are now using automatic taxoboxes, and if the pace over the last year continues, all taxon articles could have automatic taxoboxes in 4.5 years.

However, I'm not sure that universal use of automatic taxoboxes should be a goal. WikiProjects Gastropods (December 2016), WikiProject Fungi (November (2014) and WikiProject Arthropods (March 2012) have had proposals to switch to automatic taxoboxes that have attracted opposition. These three projects are largely still using manual taxoboxes.

24 May 2018

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 17 December
Algae	962	858	1820	52.9	623
Amphibians and Reptiles	11781	2445	14226	82.8	821
Animals	1866	3422	5288	35.3	1047
Arthropods	1315	5566	6881	19.1	991
Beetles	11356	23229	34585	32.8	8872
Birds	8916	4785	13701	65.1	2875
Bivalves	163	1159	1322	12.3	83
Cephalopods	865	653	1518	57.0	581
Cetaceans	356	5	361	98.6	37
Dinosaurs	1262	181	1443	87.5	37
Fishes	11374	9343	20717	54.9	3432
Fungi	329	11463	11792	2.8	136
Gastropods	7774	22984	30758	25.3	750
Insects	21085	44207	65292	32.3	10511
Lepidoptera	24314	73049	97363	25.0	8113
Mammals	2929	4246	7175	40.8	463
Marine life	1611	3066	4677	34.4	950
Microbiology	125	8615	8740	1.4	65
Palaeontology	6955	6270	13225	52.6	816
Plants	26468	34943	61411	43.1	7950
Primates	666	215	881	75.6	339
Rodents	1801	1268	3069	58.7	344
Sharks	701	47	748	93.7	15
Spiders	6199	2279	8478	73.1	1100
Turtles	512	135	647	79.1	360
Viruses	NA	1430	1430	NA	NA
Total	139619	245553	385172	36.2	48552

2 July 2018

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 17 December
Algae	966	859	1825	52.9	627
Amphibians and Reptiles	12042	2424	14466	83.2	1082
Animals	1999	3441	5440	36.7	1180
Arthropods	1320	5569	6889	19.2	996
Beetles	11598	23056	34654	33.5	9114
Birds	9348	4368	13716	68.2	3307
Bivalves	189	1134	1323	14.3	109
Cephalopods	870	654	1524	57.1	586
Cetaceans	356	5	361	98.6	37
Dinosaurs	1276	171	1447	88.2	51
Fishes	11728	9140	20868	56.2	3786
Fungi	477	11339	11816	4.0	284
Gastropods	7889	22905	30794	25.6	865
Insects	21498	43921	65419	32.9	10924
Lepidoptera	24863	72695	97558	26.3	8662
Mammals	2947	4233	7180	41.0	481
Marine life	1754	2951	4705	37.3	1093
Microbiology	230	8592	8822	2.6	170
Palaeontology	7045	6264	13309	52.9	906
Plants	27486	34100	61586	44.6	8968
Primates	668	214	882	75.7	341
Rodents	1870	1200	3070	60.9	413
Sharks	702	47	749	93.7	16
Spiders	6228	2272	8500	73.3	1129
Turtles	513	135	648	79.2	361
Viruses	NA	1431	1431	NA	NA
Total	143293	243063	386356	37.1	52226

1 January 2019

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 2 July
Algae	1014	852	1866	54.3	48
Amphibians and Reptiles	12757	2338	15095	84.5	715
Animals	2657	3645	6302	42.2	658
Arthropods	1547	6142	7689	20.1	227
Beetles	12121	22878	34999	34.6	523
Birds	11481	2306	13787	83.3	2133
Bivalves	197	1154	1351	14.6	8
Cephalopods	1017	1414	2431	41.8	147
Dinosaurs	1337	136	1473	90.8	61
Fishes	13274	7915	21189	62.6	1546
Fungi	1400	10775	12175	11.5	923
Gastropods	10015	21906	31921	31.4	2126
Insects	23165	43010	66175	35.0	1667
Lepidoptera	26498	71691	98189	27.0	1635
Mammals	4067	3296	7363	55.2	1120
Marine life	2428	2888	5316	45.7	674
Microbiology	736	9534	10270	7.2	506
Palaeontology	7876	6453	14329	55.0	831
Plants	36060	26536	62596	57.6	8574
Primates	812	83	895	90.7	144
Rodents	2893	179	3072	94.2	1023
Sharks	705	43	748	94.3	3
Spiders	6370	2185	8555	74.5	142
Tree of Life	51	178	229	22.3	?
Turtles	601	56	657	91.5	88
Viruses	276	1224	1500	18.4	276
Total	165819	226196	392015	42.3	22526

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	630	781	1411	44.6
Cetaceans	384	8	392	98.0
Cats	186	25	211	88.2
Dogs	203	38	241	84.2
Equine	85	28	113	75.2

26 June 2019

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 1 January
Algae	1162	750	1912	60.8	148
Amphibians and Reptiles	14036	2178	16214	86.6	1279
Animals	3366	3563	6929	48.6	709
Arthropods	1704	6394	8098	21.0	157
Beetles	12452	22789	35241	35.3	331
Birds	13658	168	13826	98.8	2177
Bivalves	1309	69	1378	95.0	1112
Cephalopods	1304	1147	2451	53.2	287
Dinosaurs	1372	127	1499	91.5	35
Fishes	14427	7256	21683	66.5	1153
Fungi	1499	10769	12268	12.2	99
Gastropods	11777	20938	32715	36.0	1762
Insects	24216	42515	66731	36.3	1051
Lepidoptera	27685	70305	97990	28.3	1187
Mammals	6209	1228	7437	83.5	2142
Marine life	3181	2815	5996	53.1	753
Microbiology	1403	9799	11202	12.5	667
Palaeontology	9030	5837	14867	60.7	1154
Plants	41312	22217	63529	65.0	5252
Primates	908	3	911	99.7	96
Rodents	2937	120	3057	96.1	44
Sharks	730	36	766	95.3	25
Spiders	6888	1709	8597	80.1	518
Tree of Life	98	62	160	61.2	47
Turtles	624	37	661	94.4	23
Viruses	610	919	1529	39.9	334
Total	185055	211757	396812	46.6	19236

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1460	8	1468	99.5
Cats	223	14	237	94.1
Cetaceans	410	0	410	100.0
Dogs	256	8	264	97.0
Equine	114	0	114	100.0

1 January 2020

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 26 June 2018
Algae	1290	640	1930	66.8	128
Amphibians and Reptiles	15958	631	16589	96.2	1922
Animals	3742	3402	7144	52.4	376
Arthropods	1875	6363	8238	22.8	171
Beetles	12813	22581	35394	36.2	361
Birds	13717	156	13873	98.9	59
Bivalves	1319	66	1385	95.2	10
Cephalopods	1306	1146	2452	53.3	2
Dinosaurs	1393	116	1509	92.3	21
Diptera	5050	5893	10943	46.1	NA
Fishes	15474	6506	21980	70.4	1047
Fungi	1644	10688	12332	13.3	145
Gastropods	12387	20577	32964	37.6	610
Insects	25844	42295	68139	37.9	1628
Lepidoptera	28967	69104	98071	29.5	1282
Mammals	6821	688	7509	90.8	612
Marine life	3591	2628	6219	57.7	410
Microbiology	1441	9893	11334	12.7	38
Palaeontology	9586	5622	15208	63.0	556
Plants	47757	16481	64238	74.3	6445
Primates	913	1	914	99.9	5
Rodents	2980	92	3072	97.0	43
Sharks	732	36	768	95.3	2
Spiders	7186	1481	8667	82.9	298
Tree of Life	102	60	162	63.0	4
Turtles	651	0	651	100.0	27
Viruses	768	851	1619	47.4	158
Total	200835	200629	401464	50.0	15780

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1484	3	1487	99.8
Cats	214	13	227	94.3
Cetaceans	411	0	411	100.0
Dogs	244	9	253	96.4
Equine	101	0	101	100.0

1 July 2020

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 1 January 2020
Algae	1411	540	1951	72.3	121
Amphibians and Reptiles	17315	350	17665	98.0	1357
Animals	3981	3414	7395	53.8	239
Arthropods	4639	6217	10856	42.7	2764
Beetles	13641	22068	35709	38.2	828
Birds	13728	149	13877	98.9	11
Bivalves	1330	67	1397	95.2	11
Cephalopods	1327	1132	2459	54.0	21
Dinosaurs	1429	89	1518	94.1	36
Diptera	5966	5735	11701	51.0	916
Fishes	16330	5804	22134	73.8	856
Fungi	2861	9586	12447	23.0	1217
Gastropods	13267	19789	33056	40.1	880
Insects	28499	40872	69371	41.1	2655
Lepidoptera	33030	64722	97752	33.8	4063
Mammals	6770	647	7417	91.3	-51
Marine life	3816	2556	6382	59.8	225
Microbiology	1809	9407	11216	16.1	368
Palaeontology	10068	5428	15496	64.8	482
Plants	53101	12452	65553	81.0	5344
Primates	928	2	930	99.8	15
Rodents	2978	93	3071	97.0	-2
Sharks	736	37	773	95.2	4
Spiders	7353	1402	8755	84.0	167
Tree of Life	121	58	179	67.6	19
Turtles	678	1	679	99.9	27
Viruses	1477	189	1666	88.7	709
Total	221946	186512	408458	54.3	21111

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1531	4	1535	99.7
Cats	228	0	228	100
Cetaceans	411	0	411	100
Dogs	254	1	255	99.6
Equine	102	0	102	100

6 January 2021 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 1 July 2020
Algae	1445	537	1982	72.9	34
Amphibians and Reptiles	17679	349	18028	98.1	364
Animals	4400	3347	7747	56.8	419
Arthropods	5044	5928	10972	46.0	405
Beetles	15244	20595	35839	42.5	1603
Birds	13868	128	13996	99.1	140
Bivalves	1343	65	1408	95.4	13
Cephalopods	1344	1127	2471	54.4	17
Dinosaurs	1452	89	1541	94.2	23
Diptera	6197	5614	11811	52.5	231
Fishes	17122	5218	22340	76.6	792
Fungi	3270	9256	12526	26.1	409
Gastropods	14466	18682	33148	43.6	1199
Insects	31182	38734	69916	44.6	2683
Lepidoptera	35641	61923	97564	36.5	2611
Mammals	7010	618	7628	91.9	240
Marine life	4155	2472	6627	62.7	339
Microbiology	2000	9348	11348	17.6	191
Palaeontology	10490	5439	15929	65.9	422
Plants	56562	12094	68656	82.4	3461
Primates	933	3	936	99.7	5
Rodents	2993	80	3073	97.4	15
Sharks	764	64	828	92.3	28
Spiders	8757	78	8835	99.1	1404
Tree of Life	129	58	187	69.0	8
Turtles	685	17	702	97.6	7
Viruses	1528	152	1680	90.9	51
Total	269429	176785	446214	60.4	47483

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1537	5	1542	99.7
Cats	215	0	215	100
Cetaceans	417	2	419	99.5
Dogs	248	1	249	99.6
Equine	104	0	104	100

30 June 2021

30 June 2021 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percent auto	# auto added since 6 January 2021	# manual subtracted
Algae	1732	538	2270	76.3	287	-1
Amphibians and Reptiles	18838	321	19159	98.3	1159	28
Animals	6195	3061	9256	66.9	1795	286
Arthropods	6809	4925	11734	58.0	1765	1003
Beetles	16443	19930	36373	45.2	1199	665
Birds	13909	122	14031	99.1	41	6
Bivalves	1437	65	1502	95.7	94	0
Cephalopods	1386	1107	2493	55.6	42	20
Dinosaurs	1534	21	1555	98.6	82	61
Diptera	8839	4816	13655	64.7	2642	798
Fishes	19044	3724	22768	83.6	1922	1494
Fungi	5752	7452	13204	43.6	2482	1804
Gastropods	17171	16258	33429	51.4	2705	2424
Insects	37915	35311	73226	51.8	6733	3423
Lepidoptera	39072	58742	97544	40.1	3431	3181
Mammals	7128	534	7662	93.0	118	84
Marine life	5138	2038	7176	71.6	983	434
Microbiology	2103	9920	12023	17.5	103	-572
Palaeontology	11115	5058	16173	68.7	625	381
Plants	63969	8421	72390	88.4	7407	3673
Primates	935	3	938	99.7	2	0
Rodents	2999	76	3075	97.5	6	4
Sharks	773	60	833	92.8	9	4
Spiders	9130	0	9130	100.0	373	78
Tree of Life	129	59	188	68.6	0	-1
Turtles	710	5	715	99.3	25	12
Viruses	1594	140	1734	91.9	66	12
Total	268553	159352	427905	62.8	-876	17433

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1540	5	1545	99.7
Cats	206	0	206	100.0
Cetaceans	419	2	421	99.5
Dogs	237	3	240	98.8
Equine	104	0	140	100.0

30 December 2021

30 December 2021 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 30 June 2021	# manual subtracted
Algae	1796	509	2305	77.9	64	29
Amphibians and Reptiles	19494	296	19790	98.5	656	25
Animals	8597	2554	11151	77.1	2402	507
Arthropods	7881	4276	12157	64.8	1072	649
Beetles	19066	18564	37630	50.7	2623	1366
Birds	14083	96	14179	99.3	174	26
Bivalves	1581	36	1617	97.8	144	29
Cephalopods	1522	980	2502	60.8	136	127
Dinosaurs	1582	9	1591	99.4	48	12
Diptera	10734	3963	14697	73.0	1895	853
Fishes	20156	3121	23277	86.6	1112	603
Fungi	6829	6662	13491	50.6	1077	790
Gastropods	18567	15327	33894	54.8	1396	931
Insects	44371	31653	76024	58.4	6456	3658
Lepidoptera	46518	51501	98019	47.5	7446	7241
Mammals	7583	330	7913	95.8	455	204
Marine life	6971	1802	8773	79.5	1833	236
Microbiology	3127	9016	12143	25.8	1024	904
Palaeontology	12055	4553	16608	72.6	940	505
Plants	68380	5922	74302	92.0	4411	2499
Primates	973	0	973	100.0	38	3
Rodents	3056	34	3090	98.9	57	42
Sharks	789	49	838	94.2	16	11
Spiders	9257	0	9257	100.0	127	0
Tree of Life	74	11	85	87.1	-55	48
Turtles	726	0	726	100.0	16	5
Viruses	1690	56	1746	96.8	96	84
Total	295889	140605	436494	67.8	27336	18747

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1563	0	1563	100.0
Cats	205	2	207	99.0
Cetaceans	426	0	426	100.0
Dogs	241	0	241	100.0
Equine	105	0	105	100.0

30 June 2022

30 June 2022 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 30 December 2021	# manual subtracted
Algae	2039	285	2324	87.7	243	224
Amphibians and Reptiles	20407	234	20641	98.9	913	62
Animals	9041	2337	11378	79.5	444	217
Arthropods	8252	4097	12349	66.8	371	179
Beetles	19965	18059	38024	52.5	899	505
Birds	14141	89	14230	99.4	58	7
Bivalves	1621	35	1656	97.9	40	1
Cephalopods	1840	682	2522	73.0	318	298
Dinosaurs	1599	5	1604	99.7	17	4
Diptera	11368	3553	14921	76.2	634	430
Fishes	21434	2834	24268	88.3	1278	287
Fungi	7973	6201	14174	56.3	1144	461
Gastropods	20067	13888	33955	59.1	1500	1439
Insects	46541	29968	76509	60.8	2170	1685
Lepidoptera	57636	40705	98341	58.6	11118	10796
Mammals	7950	192	8142	97.6	367	138
Marine life	7279	1648	8927	81.5	308	154
Microbiology	4848	7878	12726	38.1	1721	1138
Palaeontology	13232	3960	17192	77.0	1177	593
Plants	73493	2997	76490	96.1	5113	2925
Primates	974	0	974	100.0	1	0
Rodents	3063	31	3094	99.0	7	3
Sharks	792	48	840	94.3	3	1
Spiders	9426	0	9426	100.0	169	0
Tree of Life	80	9	89	89.9	6	2
Turtles	744	1	745	99.9	18	-1
Viruses	1705	56	1761	96.8	15	0
Total	324943	120940	445883	72.9	29054	19665

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1573	0	1573	100.0
Cats	187	0	187	100.0
Cetaceans	427	0	427	100.0
Dogs	241	0	241	100.0
Equine	106	0	106	100.0

30 December 2022

30 December 2022 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 30 June 2022	# manual subtracted
Algae	2077	283	2360	88.0	38	2
Amphibians and Reptiles	20981	231	21212	98.9	574	3
Animals	9688	2244	11932	81.2	647	93
Arthropods	9049	3613	12662	71.5	797	484
Beetles	20549	17502	38051	54.0	584	557
Birds	14195	84	14279	99.4	54	5
Bivalves	1644	33	1677	98.0	23	2
Cephalopods	1969	570	2539	77.6	129	112
Dinosaurs	1618	4	1622	99.8	19	1
Diptera	12673	2827	15500	81.8	1305	726
Fishes	22118	2668	24786	89.2	684	166
Fungi	8953	5797	14750	60.7	980	404
Gastropods	22676	11353	34029	66.6	2609	2535
Insects	49427	27994	77421	63.8	2886	1974
Lepidoptera	66328	32052	98380	67.4	8692	8653
Mammals	8051	184	8235	97.8	101	8
Marine life	7584	1468	9052	83.8	305	180
Microbiology	5760	7127	12887	44.7	912	751
Palaeontology	13703	3796	17499	78.3	471	164
Plants	75891	1970	77861	97.5	2398	1027
Primates	981	0	981	100	7	0
Protista	103	21	124	83.1	NA	NA
Rodents	3062	30	3092	99.0	-1	1
Sharks	804	50	854	94.1	12	-2
Spiders	9475	0	9475	100	49	0
Tree of Life	79	11	90	87.8	-1	-2
Turtles	747	2	749	99.7	3	-1
Viruses	1708	58	1766	96.7	3	-2
Total	345989	104689	450678	76.8	21046	16251

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1576	0	1576	100
Cats	188	0	188	100
Cetaceans	428	0	428	100
Dogs	241	0	241	100
Equine	106	0

30 June 2023

30 June 2023 update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 30 December 2022	# manual subtracted
Algae	2105	278	2383	88.3	28	5
Amphibians and Reptiles	22170	219	22389	99.0	1189	12
Animals	10084	2058	12142	83.1	396	186
Arthropods	9908	3424	13332	74.3	859	189
Beetles	22341	15703	38044	58.7	1792	1799
Birds	14291	81	14372	99.4	96	3
Bivalves	1660	34	1694	98.0	16	-1
Cephalopods	1999	568	2567	77.9	30	2
Dinosaurs	1632	1	1633	99.9	14	3
Diptera	13385	2642	16027	83.5	712	185
Fishes	23998	1862	25860	92.8	1880	806
Fungi	9643	5684	15327	62.9	690	113
Gastropods	24442	9750	34192	71.5	1766	1603
Insects	52855	25318	78173	67.6	3428	2676
Lepidoptera	69755	28593	98348	70.9	3427	3459
Mammals	8206	153	8359	98.2	155	31
Marine life	7944	1320	9264	85.8	360	148
Microbiology	6244	6693	12937	48.3	484	434
Palaeontology	14090	3736	17826	79.0	387	60
Plants	78452	964	79416	98.8	2561	1006
Primates	980	0	980	100	-1	0
Protista	170	25	195	87.2	67	-4
Rodents	3120	29	3149	99.1	58	1
Sharks	818	49	867	94.3	14	1
Spiders	9698	0	9698	100	223	0
Tree of Life	82	11	93	88.2	3	0
Turtles	754	1	755	99.9	7	1
Viruses	1714	56	1770	96.8	6	2
Total	364568	93154	457722	79.6	18579	11535

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats	1597	0	1597	100
Cats	180	0	180	100
Cetaceans	433	0	433	100
Dogs	243	0	243	100
Equine	107	0	107	100

30 December 2023

30 December update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since 30 June 2023	# manual subtracted
Algae	2163	227	2390	90.5	58	51
Amphibians and Reptiles	22524	206	22730	99.1	354	13
Animals	11167	1158	12325	90.6	1083	900
Arthropods	10774	3067	13841	77.8	866	357
Beetles	24731	13421	38152	64.8	2390	2282
Birds	14358	62	14420	99.6	67	19
Bivalves	1674	32	1706	98.1	14	2
Cephalopods	2009	566	2575	78.0	10	2
Dinosaurs	1643	0	1643	100	11	1
Diptera	14160	2165	16325	86.7	775	477
Fishes	24408	1671	26079	93.6	410	191
Fungi	10655	5171	15826	67.3	1012	513
Gastropods	27510	7224	34734	79.2	3068	2526
Insects	57978	20719	78697	73.7	5123	4599
Lepidoptera	74631	23766	98397	75.8	4876	4827
Mammals	8301	144	8445	98.3	95	9
Marine life	8723	672	9395	92.8	779	648
Microbiology	6971	6030	13001	53.6	727	663
Palaeontology	14779	3474	18253	81.0	689	262
Plants	79920	611	80531	99.2	1468	353
Primates	979	0	979	100	-1	0
Protista	380	80	460	82.6	210	-55
Rodents	3137	28	3165	99.1	17	1
Sharks	829	45	874	94.9	11	4
Spiders	10040	0	10040	100	342	0
Tree of Life	89	6	95	93.7	7	5
Turtles	759	0	759	100	5	1
Viruses	1722	55	1777	96.9	8	1
Total	383888	76708	460596	83.3	19320	16446

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats
Cats	186	0	186	100
Cetaceans	439	0	439	100
Dogs	241	0	241	100
Equine	109	0	109	100

Blank usage table

<date> update

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto	# auto added since <previous date>	# manual subtracted
Algae
Amphibians and Reptiles
Animals
Arthropods
Beetles
Birds
Bivalves
Cephalopods
Dinosaurs
Diptera
Fishes
Fungi
Gastropods
Insects
Lepidoptera
Mammals
Marine life
Microbiology
Palaeontology
Plants
Primates
Protista
Rodents
Sharks
Spiders
Tree of Life
Turtles
Viruses
Total

Mammal subprojects with articles tagged for both mammals and subproject:

Project	Auto	Manual	Total taxa	Percentage auto
Bats
Cats
Cetaceans
Dogs
Equine

IOC exceptions

Talk:Fawn-coloured lark Talk:Common gull Talk:Australian wood duck Talk:American purple gallinule Talk:Common raven Talk:Gray-lined hawk Talk:Gray thrasher Talk:Slate-coloured grosbeak Talk:Tricoloured munia Talk:Dull-coloured grassquit Talk:Slate-coloured seedeater Talk:Mouse-coloured tapaculo Talk:Gray-throated warbling finch Talk:Multicoloured tanager Talk:Gray-barred wren Talk:Mouse-coloured penduline tit Talk:Grayish baywing Talk:Sand-coloured nighthawk Talk:Gray-headed kite Talk:Blue-gray tanager Talk:Gray kingbird Talk:American gray flycatcher Talk:Gray catbird Talk:Gray-crowned rosy finch Talk:Blue-gray gnatcatcher Talk:Black-throated gray warbler Talk:Gray vireo Talk:Gray hawk Talk:Osprey Talk:Kererū Talk:Northern New Zealand dotterel Talk:New Zealand dotterel

Other

DAB cleanup

• Olive (disambiguation) (no Neelix involvement, olive snail entry seems legit, though the bird and primate entries are partial title matches)
• Pearly (no Neelix involvement, a bunch of legit entries, but also a bunch of partial title matches for organism common names)
• Western Wood (non organism entries, but the organisms are partial title matches)
• Giant spiny (move over redirect to giant spiny stick insect or giant spiny walking stick?)
• Hoary (not just organisms listed, but all entries are partial title matches or a dictionary definition. redirect to Wiktionary?)

Draft

Incorporate with User:Plantdrew/Essay Equating the avian sense of "cardinal" with Cardinalidae appears to be a Wikipedia innovation.

To head off WP:COMMONNAME immediately: "the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" for the subject of this article is Cardinalidae. The WP:OFFICIAL English name that isn't the scientific name is Cardinals, Grosbeaks and allies

• There's never been an encyclopedia the size of Wikipedia, and I'm not sure that it can really be considered to be written overall for the "general public" at this point. While there are many general interest articles, there are even more articles that are of interest to some particular niche audience. Sports fans read articles on professional athletes; if an athlete article mentions a notable achievement, it's not going to give the full rules of the sport that provide full context to that achievement. If a article on an episode of a TV series mentions an event relevant to an ongoing plot point, it's not going to give a full discussion of how that plot point has developed over all previous episodes. While that doesn't mean we should embrace jargon, I do think we can assume that for most niche topics, the likely audience already has some background in the broader topic. The majority of our organism articles are only going to be of interest to a small subset of people, who will be familiar with the concept of scientific names, and not necessarily intimidated by them.

WP:COMMONNAME was written at a time before it was clear that Wikipedia was going to be the 5th most popular website in the world, and before search engines were quite as a good as they are today. In the early days, we couldn't be sure that people searching for "Bill Clinton" would necessarily find a Wikipedia article titled William Jefferson Clinton. In order to make sure people found that article we put it at the COMMONNAME ("Bill Clinton" is clearly the most likely search term). "Common name" happens to be a term of art in taxonomy; some taxonomically interested Wikipedians back in the early days interpretated COMMONNAME to mean "avoid scientific names" at all costs. This has lead to some long-standing titles where scientific names are avoided, but it was never considered whether the title used actually helped readers find the subject they were interested. People looking for a bird called a cardinal are almost certainly looking for northern cardinal, an iconic and common species in eastern North America, but cardinal (bird) is about a family of some 50 species, only 3 of which are known as "cardinals"; but at least the awful scientific name Cardinalidae was avoided. Pig was first created as an article about domestic pigs but early in it's history was changed to cover the genus Sus; scientific name avoided, but do people searching for "pig" really want to read about the genus (and if they're interested in a larger group of animals than domestic pigs, who are we to assume they aren't also interested in javelinas which are in the same suborder, but a different family)? Turkey (bird) is about the genus Meleagris. Every year it sees a massive spike in page views during the American Thanksgiving holiday and a smaller spike for Christmas.

(genus)

1. Mandragora (genus): Mandragora is a dab page
2. Cassia (genus): Cassia
3. Musa (genus): Musa
4. Lotus (genus): Lotus
5. Asparagus (genus): Asparagus
6. Aster (genus): Aster
7. Gloxinia (genus): Gloxinia
8. Sequoia (genus): Sequoia
9. Stevia (genus): Stevia
10. Vanilla (genus): Vanilla
11. Citronella (genus): Citronella
12. Opopanax (genus): Opopanax
13. Cotyledon (genus): Cotyledon is an article about plant anatomy, and a clear primary topic
14. Crypsis (genus): Crypsis is a biology topic and mentions plants
15. Jarilla (genus): Jarilla is a dab page
16. Phyla (genus): Phyla is a dab page mentioning another biology sense; the plural of phylum. Traditional botanical equivalent of phylum is division (botany), which redirects to phylum. Division (horticulture) another plant related meaning. "Phylum (plant)"/"Phyla (plant)" not really likely search terms for the taxonomic rank between kingdom and class.
17. Pimenta (genus): Pimenta
18. Pleomele (genus): Pleomele

draft reply

• Keep, Oppose redirecting The CONTENTFORK is the result of the nominator copying content from species/genus articles into the tribe article shortly before they opened this AfD proposing to redirect the species/genus article they had copied from. Using AfD to arrive at a consensus for which CONTENTFORKed title should be preserved when the nominating editor DISCOVERS a content fork is appropriate. Using AfD to ratify a resolution to a content fork the nominating editor CREATES is not appropriate. There is a WP:TRAINWRECK; Knulliana had more significantly more information when the AfD was initiated than any other nominated article. I think it could stand alone as a stub (not a sub-stub) in it's state at the time of the AfD nomination. It has since been expanded, along with other articles nominated in this AfD. The genus article Knulliana gets more page views than the tribe article Bothriospilini (12/day long term vs. 1/day) Tribes are taxonomic minutiae; they are rarely mentioned in sources with SIGCOV of a species. Families are regularly mentioned. Genera are inherently mentioned as the first word in the binomial name of a species. Readers might reasonably expect to find Wikipedias most detailed coverage of a species in a genus article. As a test case, this AfD seems to seek to set a precedent that Wikipedias most detailed coverage of a species could be found whereever it "fits" (by article size). Species might be covered in detail in an article for genus/tribe/subfamily/family. This isn't an outcome that would b help readers at all. I'm much less opposed to merging species sub-stubs to genus articles than I

Some thoughts in no particular order. The reason taxon articles don't get deleted isn't because of WP:SPECIESOUTCOMES. It is because there is always an alternative to deletion; an article can be redirected to an accepted name if it is a synonym, or redirected to a higher taxon if it is decided that a stand-alone article is unwarranted. However, in practice, deciding that a stand-alone article is unwarranted and redirecting to a higher taxon has not been an outcome of any recent AfD. The idea that Wikipedia should have stand-alone articles for taxa to the extent that it currently does (and should continue to add more articles until all (extant) taxa have stand-alone articles) has been challenged. But the challengers don't seem to be aware

What would make a taxon non-notable? I'm not sure. I know what makes a taxon article go unread (editors start as readers, and unread articles don't get expanded). Articles about taxa that are uncommon, small, difficult to identify and which don't occur in English-speaking countries don't get read.

What taxa shouldn't have articles? There's already agreement not to have stand-alone articles for fossil species and monotypic taxa. I would add in articles that present one of the two possible cladistic topologies between three clades (i.e., don't name every node on a cladogram). Antennopoda and Tactopoda (as well as Lobopodia if it isn't treated as paraphyletic) representing competing topologies/hypothesized relationships between three clades. I'm not aware of any other examples like this but there may be a few.

Botanists do include years in the types of publications I think you're referring to (revisions, monographs, etc.) and do order synonyms chronologically in those publications. Lists of synonyms in Wikipedia articles on plants don't typically include years (and are generally sourced from databases that arrange synonyms alphabetically, and which may not include years (or any publication details) in the view of the synonyms of a particular accepted species (the database may have year/publication details if you click through to the record for a particular synonym). Sorting lists of plant synonyms chronologically would entail significant effort in adding years to the lists before the list could even be re-sorted. For animals, the years would already be present as part of the standard zoological authority citation.

I searched for taxonomic revisions of a plant and animal genus (chosen more or less at random). Here's how a synonym is presented in a plant revision (it was in a chronologically ordered list):

"Casearia celtidifolia Kunth, Nov. Gen. Sp. [H.B.K.] (quarto ed.) 5: 363. 1821. TYPE: Venezuela. Terr. Fed. Amazonas: ‘‘prope Angostura et Carichana, ad ripam fluminis Orinoco,’’ Humboldt & Bonpland 1047 (holotype, P not seen; isotypes, B , F neg. 13663 of B)"

And here is a synonym from the animal revision:

"Andrena subsquamularis Noskiewicz 1960: 85–89 (female). Type location: Bulgaria ("Sandansky"). Type depository: Universität von Wrocław, Poland"

The animal has the year immediately following the authority, followed by a page number (without the title of the publication). The plant has the publication immediately following the authority, followed by a page number and then the year. The format for the plant is typical for botanical publications; when the ICNafp itself cites a publication the order is: publication title, page number, year. From a quick glance through the zoological code, I'm not seeing any publication titles at all aside from the two in Article 3.

I'm getting off topic, but the basic point is that since the codes differ in whether the year is generally included in the author citation, there are differences in how the year is presented in the (botanical) contexts where it is necessary to present it. And that makes it more difficult to copy-paste a list of botanical synonyms with years (and then arrange it chronologically if it wasn't already).

But do start a thread on WT:TOL. Plantdrew (talk)

category draft reply

Wikipedia's system of categories kind of sucks. It doesn't necessarily work very well for what editors want it to do. Intersectional categories (categories covering two or more characteristics) are particularly problematic. With intersectional categories, Wikipedia editors are making decisions about what characteristics to include in the categorization, which may not be the characteristics of interest to readers (or to other editors). E.g. there is Category:20th-century American male actors, Category:American male television actors and Category:American male film actors. Somebody might be interested only in 20th-century film actors, but they won't find a category for them. It would be better if we had something like a system of tag (metadata), where users can select the tags that define the group of interest to them (e.g. 20th-century+film actors+Americans+males). But we don't have that. However, Wikidata has properties that can be searched on and in that way function similarly to tags. Wikipedia articles/Wikidata items do not necessarily have all the categories/properties that are relevant present, and even if they did there are going to be some edge cases that fall through the gaps (I don't think Wikidata has a property for "20th-century people"; while it does have birth/death dates and occupations, most actors born in 1992 were not active in as actors in the 20th-century, but a few were).

Theoretically with Petscan, Wikipedia users can search for any intersection of categories they care to. That could be 20th-century film actors, or it could be Cercozoa genera. I saw theoretically, because again, this depends on articles having the relevant categories which they might not. Category:Cercozoa genera is unnecessary if Category:Rhizaria genera and Category:Cercozoa are populated with all relevant articles; Petscan will find the article from the intersection of Cercozoa+Rhizaria genera. But Category:Rhizaria genera isn't necessary either; we could just have Category:Genera (essentially dumping all intersectional categories for taxon ranks and treating categories more like metadata tags).

However, even with a well thought out system of categories, you can't be sure that other editors won't create new subcategories that might pollute your Petscan results with unexpected articles. You certainly can't guarantee that categories won't end up being created for groups with less than 2000 species. You can't guarantee that newly created articles will be placed in the appropriate categories (I have seen new article on fungus species that lack Category:Fungus species; I add the category when I notice it is missing, but I'm not sure I always notice it's absence, nor am I sure if anybody else (Esculenta?) is checking for fungus species articles that lack the category).

1. "[Taxon] taxa" has subcategories for e.g. species, genera, families, orders. What else goes in "[Taxon] taxa"? OK, unranked clades. Also infraorders, superfamilies, subgenera? Or do you also create subcategories for each minor rank? Category:Plant unranked clades exists; some of the clades are within families, some are above order rank, at least one is above phylum/division rank.

1. "Creation of "[Taxon] species" categories". Wikipedia hasn't really had

Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Categorization

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_February_6#Category:Bromeliaceae_species