Talk:List of Tachinidae genera

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Diptera Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Deletion proposal[edit]

Keep: Dear Stemonitis, I don't like this article, but you should have seen it before!: 1. Actually, I was also worried about it.

I agree with you in your comments, but I have some reasons to disagree with the proposed deletion:

It should be deleted when we have something better. Now, we don't have anything about the classification of the Tachinidae genera.
If we delete the article, you are generating automatically about 2000 orphaned articles, because I guess the most of the genera listed were created using this article, and there is no other article linked to them.

As suggestion, I would leave the article here (don't take by your own the responsability of improving) until we have something better. After that, I would propose the deletion again.

And also, I would use de {{dn}} as references to solve these disambiguations that any other day, another one could have to fix (when the families have been created).

But let me repeat: I don't like the article either. Flakinho (talk) 00:39, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't doubt that it was worse before, but that's not a reason for keeping it, and nor is the crappiness of other articles. I was expecting it to be difficult to find an authoritative list which didn't include synonyms and the like, but it turned out to be alarmingly easy, and I'm left to wonder why we ever had such a disastrous article in the first place. Anyway, you'll notice I've created a new list at a new title, from a referenced source. I haven't copied the pictures over, but I wouldn't be against their inclusion. Most of the {{dn}} entries from the last version actually vanish once you restrict the list to actual genera that are actually in the Tachinidae. --Stemonitis (talk) 06:18, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've now gone through as far as Anurophylla, redirecting worthless one-line articles back here. For synonyms of other genera, I've added the synonyms to the other genus article, and redirected any other synonyms there, too. Articles in Category:Tachinidae that didn't even appear as synonyms on O'Hara's list, and didn't appear to be simple typos of other names, I have deleted. Although I'm only half-way through the A section, I've already brought the category down from around 2,400 articles to 2,266. There's still a long way to go... --Stemonitis (talk) 07:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work, Stemonitis. I agree with you in your conclusions, and also I consider them because you have more experience in Wikipedia than me. I always respect any people who object problems with their own work, not only deleting info. I'm a scientist, but not biologist, so I'm afraid I can't help as I would like. Let me know if you need something. Flakinho (talk) 14:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heliaia redirect[edit]

The reason I put it in (and then put it back) was that Heliaea, an alternate spelling of Heliaia, redirects here for some reason. User:Jonwilliamsl(talk|contribs) 22:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Upon inspection, it looks like the reason is that there is a heliaea genera. I'll change that redirect instead. Make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonwilliamsl (talk • contribs) 22:46, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Tachinidae genera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706211242/http://www.uoguelph.ca/nadsfly/Tach/Genera/Gentach_ver4.pdf to http://www.uoguelph.ca/nadsfly/Tach/Genera/Gentach_ver4.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:04, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]