The curator guide states “If a species has no common name in usage, do not make one up. For example, do not create a new common name based on its scientific name or based on a translation of a common name from another language.” As I understand that, the criteria for a name being permissible under …

I disagree - this is the equivalent of making the default name for both coast live oak and Engelman oak just “oak”. In a similar case several agave sp used to have the default name “century plant” and yes, people call them that, but it’s extremely counterproductive to have multiple with that identic…

This is how I personally operate on iNat common names. A paper using it is good enough for me to add it.

The reality is it “should” be okay to make common names in moderation, that’s how they are created to begin with, and iNaturalist is a unique community that has awareness and knowledge of where names could benefit. But allowing a free-for-all is of course, generally not desirable, and that is what …

[image] gheaton: I disagree - this is the equivalent of making the default name for both coast live oak and Engelman oak just “oak”. In a similar case several agave sp used to have the default name “century plant” and yes, people call them that, but it’s extremely counterproductive to have multi…

[image] mftasp: I don’t think making up common names is O This is clear in the current guidelines I think adopting them after they were created against policy just because they’ve been used elsewhere is only rewarding bad behaviour and should not be allowed. But what about the current pol…

[image] jasonhernandez74: people see only one option for “pulque agave,” they know the plant they are looking at is called “pulque agave,” so that’s the option they choose. Yes it is confusing either way! A personal example for me: locally Cucurbita foetidissima is coyote melon. There’s a pop…

May inat could provide an option in the settings where users can create a own list where they can check some taxons and give them some own name. Actually it is possible to choose how inat will display names, i use scientific name first (displayed in bold) and then i also see the german name and the…

I don’t know. TBH I find the whole way that iNat treats common names, trying to make them conform to rules like no duplicates, kinda funny. Common names are what they are. They have no rules and we already have a rules-based, systematic system of adding names to organisms, why invent a parallel one? …

(and Greek and many others too) When the scientific name tells us something useful - nudicaulis, acaulos - but if The Name is ‘Smith’s flower’ I prefer the common name, if it has one.

Interpretation of rule against invented common names

General

insectobserver123 September 5, 2025, 2:43am 32

This is a question about what counts as a source, which is a separate issue from whether a sourced name is prohibited based on its origin

Topic		Replies	Views
Common names invented on iNat General common-names	192	12747	March 29, 2023
Curator guidelines about made-up names Curators common-names	80	2314	September 24, 2024
Definition of made up common names Curators	37	1367	February 17, 2024
Inventing common names redux General	68	2593	May 6, 2023
Common names from "not good enough" sources Curators	72	5565	November 16, 2021

Interpretation of rule against invented common names

Related topics