The lack of common names is more important than translation of the site. I always wonder why this has such a low priority for the site. Maybe cause the origin in English?
Does someone know a robot like Selenium who can add some Dutch common names?
1 Like
Is it all corrected ? I do not see it
Potamogeton friesii
I thought it should go by WikiData and complete annotated lists with source
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puntig_fonteinkruid
My list connects Puntig_fonteinkruid to Potamogeton mucronatus and iNaturalist links it to Potamogeton malaianus
and wikipedia links it to Potamogeton wrightii
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/779448-Potamogeton-malaianus
Bron: Wikipedia
Potamogeton wrightii, is an aquatic plant species in the genus Potamogeton. It is found in slow-moving fresh water.
Potamogeton-malaianus has been requested today for curation.
https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_changes/84836
For now I’m adding names presented on this website https://warbler.ru/alfavitnyiy-ukazatel/ those we have in database are the same it shows, so I hope it has correct names, big plus in it having names of not so well presented European languages, but I already found species lacking German, Spanish or Italian names. But it won’t last for long.
My addition to Linnet:
Is it not more convenient to fill Wikidata ? There was disscussion on it but than in the future people can more easiyl translate species.
I would use annotated lists so you know the right common name is to the right latin name.
In my opinion i would restrict it to 1-2 names to prevent an babilion waterfall. (Babylonische spraakverwarring)
How Wikidata can help it? There’re existing pages for species in languages that’re missing on iNat.
Do conlangs count?
@twiane
Is it possible to query ‘‘how many common names are added under each lexicon’’ for @marina_gorbunova ?
I think the smallest lexicon can be discarded cause no one will use them…
SELECT lexicon, COUNT() count
FROM taxon_names
GROUP BY lexicon
HAVING COUNT() > 10
ORDER BY count DESC;
lexicon | count
---------------------------------------------------+---------
Chinese (Traditional) | 23853
Chinese Traditional | 414
1 Like
are you running sql against your own copy of this table, or are you querying the actual database? if the latter, how are you querying against the database?
I wish it was option 2 but it is option three 3, I got the data and some kind of query from github forum and added some magic.
Melodi: you have to do some arithmetic as you can see at this moment Chinese has two lexicons in iNaturalist…
yes, but it was also in my mailbox and that is where I found it.
Here’s a list of name counts for reptiles, mammals, amphibians and birds in all the site translated languages and a few others (there are over 400 lexicons). The data is a few months old, was not collected all at the same time and has changed since. It was originally gathered to find names with missing lexicons.
| Lexicon | Reptiles | Mammals | Amphibians | Birds | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scientific Names | 16022 | 11047 | 9013 | 34250 | 70332 |
| Afrikaans | 125 | 481 | 14 | 513 | 1133 |
| Albanian | 0 | 23 | 1 | 3 | 27 |
| Arabic | 179 | 634 | 21 | 1751 | 2585 |
| Basque | 2 | 53 | 1 | 61 | 117 |
| Breton | 2 | 26 | 0 | 4 | 32 |
| Bulgarian | 27 | 105 | 22 | 134 | 288 |
| Catalan | 49 | 155 | 28 | 391 | 623 |
| Chinese (Simplified) | 1159 | 1061 | 355 | 2731 | 5306 |
| Chinese (Traditional) | 354 | 649 | 114 | 926 | 2043 |
| Czech | 1571 | 4432 | 3933 | 11305 | 21241 |
| Danish | 135 | 224 | 20 | 832 | 1211 |
| Dutch | 416 | 3171 | 163 | 27277 | 31027 |
| English | 10354 | 8289 | 4749 | 17010 | 40402 |
| Esperanto | 8 | 35 | 1 | 34 | 78 |
| Estonian | 24 | 319 | 18 | 1355 | 1716 |
| Finnish | 78 | 5563 | 60 | 10550 | 16251 |
| French | 497 | 2512 | 232 | 6963 | 10204 |
| Galician | 16 | 40 | 12 | 121 | 189 |
| German | 1731 | 2830 | 205 | 9171 | 13937 |
| Greek | 79 | 132 | 33 | 540 | 784 |
| Hebrew | 208 | 454 | 36 | 576 | 1274 |
| Indonesian | 85 | 147 | 44 | 964 | 1240 |
| Italian | 354 | 766 | 101 | 1079 | 2300 |
| Japanese | 420 | 492 | 144 | 2289 | 3345 |
| Korean | 132 | 250 | 65 | 627 | 1074 |
| Latvian | 1 | 9 | 0 | 16 | 26 |
| Lithuanian | 11 | 116 | 22 | 449 | 598 |
| Luxembourgish | 5 | 51 | 5 | 322 | 383 |
| Maori | 22 | 54 | 6 | 240 | 322 |
| Macedonian | 1 | 24 | 0 | 2 | 27 |
| Norwegian | 5 | 79 | 6 | 518 | 608 |
| Occitan | 2 | 23 | 0 | 2 | 27 |
| Ojibwe | 34 | 77 | 23 | 151 | 285 |
| Polish | 56 | 374 | 33 | 498 | 961 |
| Portuguese | 862 | 1453 | 235 | 3501 | 6051 |
| Russian | 2098 | 1874 | 887 | 3425 | 8284 |
| Slovak | 11 | 35 | 8 | 233 | 287 |
| Spanish | 1981 | 2803 | 1557 | 5402 | 11743 |
| Swedish | 37 | 161 | 32 | 731 | 961 |
| Turkish | 4 | 13 | 0 | 62 | 79 |
3 Likes
So conlangs do count. Or at least Esperanto does.
Anyone can add a name to a taxon, in any lexicon. Some lexicons aren’t languages, like the AOU 4-Letter and herbarium codes.
If a lexicon has not yet been added, is there a way to create it?
1 Like
Yes anyone can create a lexicon, which has lead to duplicates like Norwegian Bokmål and Norwegian Bokmal; and Nonbre Comun, Nombres Científicos, Nomes Científicos, Nomi Scientifici, Noms Scientifiques, Научные названия and 學名. There are about 670 lexicons at this moment!
1 Like
Thank you a lot!
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.