iNat guidelines are clear that a common name should only be added to a taxon if the name already exists outside iNat, but I am not aware of any consensus or previous forum discussion on if or when a common name that does exist outside iNat should be deemed too confusing and removed from iNat, this i…

This is a good point, I am the one who put “thief ant” on Solenopsis molesta, when I went through and put on all the ESA ant common names, but not that you mention it I think this was a mistake on ESA’s part that we are not obliged to repeat, so I will remove the name EDIT: looks like you already d…

On the thief ant issue I agree with you, I think ESA erred by applying an almost genus level common name to a single hard to identify species and we should not repeat the error. Put simply my thoughts on Monomorium are that “little black ant” created an unusual amount of misidentifications, but th…

[image] insectobserver123: I can’t speak to anyone else’s reasons, but in this case my argument is that the common name is not just official but has been very widely used for decades to the point where not including the common name is confusing or misleading. I can understand that, and think …

I feel like this is where we should have some freedom to mildly adapt names I agree with you on this, I have even done this a couple times years ago, but I thought I had since read we weren’t allowed to do this, if this is OK it should be clarified in the name guidelines Then, “Little Black Ant…

[image] insectobserver123: This would be problematic IMO because as far as I know neither L. claviger nor L. interjectus is way more common than the other, so calling one the “common” one is misleading. Maybe just replace “yellow” with “citronella” for clarity and call it “smaller citronella ant…

This is a problem with other arthropod groups too, like spiders. Similar to “Little Black Ant” or “Common House Fly” there are many overly-vague common names that cause a lot of confusion because observers will (apparently) use descriptive terms in the ID box. Names like “Brown House Spider,” even …

If any name is in use in a field guide or popular guide, then it should be on iNaturalist for beginners who use common names and popular guides. Anyone particularly interested soon moves to scientific names, and then only use popular names for the general public, politicians or for getting money (t…

One of the problems with that approach is that common names, being common names, are very often repeated in different areas for different species. My feeling on the common name issue is that everyone needs to chill out about them. They’re going to be messy, they’re going to be repetitive, they’re …

Common names can stir strong emotions sometimes, which I kind of understand actually, but this is a splendidly civil and enlightening conversation so far. Thank you, ant-people! I agree that names that are definitely in use for a particular species should stay even if they are confusing; the key q…

Removing existing common names that are deemed confusing

General

insectobserver123 April 21, 2023, 4:35am 12

Sounds good to me now that you pointed that out, and I see someone already made L. interjectus “larger citronella ant”

Topic		Replies	Views
What to do about silly common names? General common-names	53	2365	August 5, 2024
Common names from "not good enough" sources Curators	72	5534	November 16, 2021
Common names invented on iNat General common-names	192	12708	March 29, 2023
Editing Common Names for Consistency Curators	50	1374	November 29, 2025
Best Course of Action with Deceptively Incorrect Common Name? Curators	33	1181	April 26, 2024

Removing existing common names that are deemed confusing

Related topics