[Taxacom] taxonomic names databases

[John Grehan]

In my case it would just be new species and genera as documented in recent
publications. This would be just for one family of moths (Hepialidae) and
for extant species only. The question is what is the simplest data base out
there by which such updates can be made and will automatically be
incorporated into other data bases and search engines. Irony is that a
general google search will turn up the names, but they are not in a couple
of the taxonomic databases I have looked at so far.

John Grehan

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:

> It's a good question, on which I have some views (which differ somewhat
> from Richard's), however I would be interested to see what others may
> suggest too... a lot depends on, I would suggest:
>
>   - to what group you are interested in contributing (also whether extant,
> fossil, or both)
>   - what aspects most interest you e.g. names/nomenclatural aspects,
> taxonomy/phylogeny, ecology, geographic distribution...
>   - whether you wish to contribute summaries of "mainstream"
> views/published literature or personal opinions/new interpretations (the
> latter may be less welcome than the former)
>
> Among my criteria for selecting a relevant vehicle for contributions would
> be (1) state of completeness already - since why re-do work unnecessarily
> if others have already done much of it, and (2) current impact/usage of the
> system - in other words if you put effort in, who will utilise it. In terms
> of the latter aspect, I would tend to favour databases already contributing
> to Catalogue of Life (for maximum impact/take-up), which are mainly
> "controlled units" of endeavour with their own individual contact points,
> or perhaps PaleoBiology Database for fossils (which is more open access I
> understand). Just some thoughts...
>
> Regards - Tony
>
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> https://about.me/TonyRees
>
>