Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

I am, I am. I was very sick for a while and I am ready to jump back in.

Though once again if ANYONE wants to do Beetles or Butterflies by all means don't let me stop you.

[Footkerchief]

I am, I am. I was very sick for a while and I am ready to jump back in.

Awesome, glad you're feeling better.

A lot of the bony fish orders are turning out to be pretty small.  Perciformes should make up for that, though -- it apparently has 40% of all bony fish species.  Might deserve its own page.

Also, speaking of taxonomy, we're apparently using an obsolete classification for our reptiles.  I'm neutral on this -- it's probably okay as is, but if someone wants to reorganize it, that's cool too.  If it does get reorganized, lizards should probably be moved back to the main reptile page, with snakes getting their own subpage instead.

[Igfig]

I thought I'd have a go at some of the butterflies, but alas!  Most of the species that I looked at had no common name that I could find.

Do we have a policy on what to do if an animal has no common name?  If not, I suggest that we translate the scientific name literally.  I'd be glad to offer my services as a Latin translator.

[Footkerchief]

I thought I'd have a go at some of the butterflies, but alas!  Most of the species that I looked at had no common name that I could find.

Do we have a policy on what to do if an animal has no common name?  If not, I suggest that we translate the scientific name literally.  I'd be glad to offer my services as a Latin translator.

We've gone with translated/invented names for several (vertebrate) species with inconvenient names, but only because they were sufficiently noteworthy.  For most invertebrates, a common name is as close as they'll ever get to noteworthiness.  If they lack one, you should probably lean toward lumping them into a family representative, or just excluding them.  It'd have to be a very unique butterfly to warrant a translated name -- and even then, if nobody will ever recognize it, there's little point.

[Igfig]

Gotcha.

Lepidoptera is done.  I realized that in many cases the caterpillar of the species is at least as iconic as the adult, so you'll notice that there are a bunch of larva scattered across the list.  They should probably be implemented as their own creatures, completely distinct from the adult forms, since they're so different shape-wise.

With that in mind, I'm considering separating them out to their own section after the main Lepidoptera stuff.  That way we could have a single caterpillar template for all of them.

[mendonca]

Hey cool, that's some good stuff there.

Yeah good point about the larvae, didn't occur to me.

[Fieari]

I have a complaint about Sirenidae, actually. Given that this is a fantasy game, when I hear "Siren", I don't think "tiny little slimy worm thing". I think fishgirl with magic voice. We can't call those sirens, even if that is their mundane name.

[m00npirate]

I can't believe pistol shrimp (snapping shrimp) were absent! think of the mayhem!! (added)

[Gorobay]

I have a complaint about Sirenidae, actually. Given that this is a fantasy game, when I hear "Siren", I don't think "tiny little slimy worm thing". I think fishgirl with magic voice. We can't call those sirens, even if that is their mundane name.

A similar complaint could be brought against the many lizards called "dragon".

[Lancensis]

I have a complaint about Sirenidae, actually. Given that this is a fantasy game, when I hear "Siren", I don't think "tiny little slimy worm thing". I think fishgirl with magic voice. We can't call those sirens, even if that is their mundane name.

Siren Salamander then. And they're bird-ladies, not fish-ladies.

A similar complaint could be brought against the many lizards called "dragon".

Hmm. I guess we can go with Ora for Komodo Dragons. Don't know what to do with Bearded Dragons and others.

[Footkerchief]

"Siren salamander" would be acceptable.  However, at least one siren species has the common name "mud eel."  Sirens don't seem to differ in many important ways, so maybe we could just lump them all together under the name "mud eel"?

A similar complaint could be brought against the many lizards called "dragon".

Hmm. I guess we can go with Ora for Komodo Dragons. Don't know what to do with Bearded Dragons and others.

I don't think lizards named "dragon" are as much of a problem -- unlike the sirens, they're commonly known species, so it's not as jarring.  I went with "dragon lizard" for Komodo dragons, which seems more informative than "ora."

Gotcha.

Lepidoptera is done.  I realized that in many cases the caterpillar of the species is at least as iconic as the adult, so you'll notice that there are a bunch of larva scattered across the list.  They should probably be implemented as their own creatures, completely distinct from the adult forms, since they're so different shape-wise.

With that in mind, I'm considering separating them out to their own section after the main Lepidoptera stuff.  That way we could have a single caterpillar template for all of them.

I'm still undecided as to whether caterpillars should be included at all.  It's a real can of worms (pun not intended but spotted in hindsight with shameful glee) because there are tons of notable larval forms -- maggots, grubs, etc. -- and it's not even confined to invertebrates, what with tadpoles and such.

My personal instinct is to leave them out until metamorphosis is properly supported, but if people feel strongly that they should be included despite the drawbacks, I'll try to come up with a relatively sane way of doing so.  In the mean time, I request that we not add larval forms to the list as separate creatures.

I can't believe pistol shrimp (snapping shrimp) were absent! think of the mayhem!! (added)

Holy cow, you're right, I did leave those out.  Thanks!

[Fieari]

"Siren salamander" would be acceptable.  However, at least one siren species has the common name "mud eel."  Sirens don't seem to differ in many important ways, so maybe we could just lump them all together under the name "mud eel"?

I'm all for pruning the list down just a little bit. We want to be comprehensive, but not to the point where we have two creatures with effectively -identical- raws, just different names. There's no point to that.

A similar complaint could be brought against the many lizards called "dragon".

Hmm. I guess we can go with Ora for Komodo Dragons. Don't know what to do with Bearded Dragons and others.

I don't think lizards named "dragon" are as much of a problem -- unlike the sirens, they're commonly known species, so it's not as jarring.  I went with "dragon lizard" for Komodo dragons, which seems more informative than "ora."[/quote]

Dragon Lizard works. It might help to add "lizard" to each of the mundane dragons as well-- Bearded Dragon Lizard for instance is clearer of a name than just Bearded Dragon.  The lizard emphasizes the Earth/Mundane nature of it. Lizard says "this isn't a gold hoarding virgin kidnapping firebreathing menace", but the dragon part does emphasize that it's still dangerous, if not intelligent or magical.

[Greendogo]

I tried to give some sense of organization to the "Main article: Extinct (Pre-Medieval Cenozoic)" page.  I figured the list wouldn't grow that long so I didn't go into as much detail in the taxonomy.  My main push was to add Woolly Mammoths, and Mastodons/Mammuts to the list.  I added both (with two names for the American Mastodon) because I didn't know which one was coolest.  Personally, I think the Woolly Mammoth is the coolest while I think the name for the Mastodon/Mammut sounds better.  I just want to be able to hunt them in the snowy depths of a glacier.

[Greedish]

I'm interested in contributing and I'll try to get people from Something Awful to help too, but every animal I find has already been listed. The list is MASSIVE, and I think we should at least start writing prefstrings for each animal soon. Also, there has to be a more intuitive and organized way to manage this than Wiki lists.

[Gorobay]

Also, there has to be a more intuitive and organized way to manage this than Wiki lists.

Actually, our wiki lists are intuitive, organized, and (importantly) easy to edit.

I'm still undecided as to whether caterpillars should be included at all.  It's a real can of worms (pun not intended but spotted in hindsight with shameful glee) because there are tons of notable larval forms -- maggots, grubs, etc. -- and it's not even confined to invertebrates, what with tadpoles and such.

My personal instinct is to leave them out until metamorphosis is properly supported, but if people feel strongly that they should be included despite the drawbacks, I'll try to come up with a relatively sane way of doing so.  In the mean time, I request that we not add larval forms to the list as separate creatures.

One possibility is to separate them into their own file. In Template:Ark_creature there could be a parameter to specify what file to put the creature in, so we could put larvae in creature_larvae.txt and mammoths in creature_extinct_cenozoic.txt. That way, creatures that are not the main focus of the Ark Project could still be included, but would be easy to take out.