Category talk:Animals of Australia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Category:Fauna of Australia[edit]
consensus seems to be animals of XX (e.g. Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/02/Category:Animals of Central America). if so, rename all the cats. @Bidgee and Gnangarra: who commented on Category talk:Fauna of Tasmania. Roy17 (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Same goes for Category:Fauna of Bhutan. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:23, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- I support renaming. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:47, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose the correct term is fauna, the use of animals as explained previously for Tasmania puts a significant portion of the existing categories and images in the wrong classification because animals is lower order than fauna and an inappropriate change. By all means create a sub category of animals and move the appropriate categories to there, but they remain part of the Fauna category tree Gnangarra 07:46, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- Are you thinking that animals = animalia? That's not how the term animals is being used here. The top category is Category:Animals, and that has a hatnote pointing to Category:Animalia for the taxonomic classification. Furthermore, Category:Fauna redirects to Category:Animals. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:26, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- no I'm not comparing animal to animalia, I'm saying fauna encompasses more than animals, animals being use inappropriately should be fixed rather than changing those category structures that are correct. Gnangarra 08:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- What does fauna include besides animals? Wiktionary defines it as "Animals considered as a group; especially those of a particular country, region, time". That says animals to me, and we subdivide by location. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- no I'm not comparing animal to animalia, I'm saying fauna encompasses more than animals, animals being use inappropriately should be fixed rather than changing those category structures that are correct. Gnangarra 08:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- Are you thinking that animals = animalia? That's not how the term animals is being used here. The top category is Category:Animals, and that has a hatnote pointing to Category:Animalia for the taxonomic classification. Furthermore, Category:Fauna redirects to Category:Animals. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:26, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
- Category:Fauna of Australia is a sub-category of Category:Animals by country so it doesn't fit with the tree. To be clear, Gnangarra, you are not proposing that Category:Fauna of Australia is exceptional, but that the whole tree, starting from at least Category:Animals by country, is incorrectly named and should be moved to Category:Fauna by country. That's a big change and would require discussion at Commons:Village Pump. Would you like to initiate that discussion and try to secure consensus to move the tree to "Fauna by country" ? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Support renaming "Fauna of" (Australia and Bhutan) to "Animals of", following the current standard. The argument raised (and later abandoned) by Gnangarra will probably generate a lengthy discussion; we should close this discussion first. —capmo (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I have not abandoned this, the simple fact the term is Fauna, and compliments the term Flora we categorise by the scientific terms for each species animal doesnt fit that format. Gnangarra 07:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- Gnangarra, you said "nothing to respond to" in the edit summary, ignoring that both Auntof6 and Themightyquill made you questions that went unanswered. —capmo (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- oh and I dont care about trying to argue that every category should be x or y I just sit with what is scientifically accurate and commonly used in Australia. Gnangarra 07:31, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- The terms Fauna and Flora are used by the whole Western world, not only Australia. What we're trying to determine here is whether there is or not a difference between "Fauna" and "Animals". Can you help with that? —capmo (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- I suggest w:en:Fauna you'll notice that there are 15 subclassifications all called xxxfauna with the bonus description of Zoologists and paleontologists use fauna to refer to a typical collection of animals found in a specific time or place Gnangarra 23:57, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- The terms Fauna and Flora are used by the whole Western world, not only Australia. What we're trying to determine here is whether there is or not a difference between "Fauna" and "Animals". Can you help with that? —capmo (talk) 14:52, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- I have not abandoned this, the simple fact the term is Fauna, and compliments the term Flora we categorise by the scientific terms for each species animal doesnt fit that format. Gnangarra 07:28, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
No reason given for an exception here. Moved to Category:Animals of Australia. I left a redirect from Category:Fauna of Australia so that Zoologists and paleontologists don't get confused. -- Themightyquill (talk) 11:11, 22 July 2022 (UTC)