Cynomastix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cynomastix
Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Arthropoda
Class:	Insecta
Order:	Lepidoptera
Family:	Tineidae
Genus:	Cynomastix

Cynomastix are a genus of insect, belonging to the family Tineidae.^[1]

[edit]References

1. ^ Global Taxonomic Database of Tineidae

Wikispecies has information related to: Cynomastix

 

This Tineidae-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

View page ratings

Rate this page

What’s this?

Trustworthy

Objective

Complete

Well-written

I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional)

Submit ratings

Categories:

• Tineidae
• Tineidae stubs

Navigation menu

• Create account
• Log in

• Article
• Talk

• Read
• Edit
• View history

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article
• Donate to Wikipedia

Interaction

• Help
• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia

Toolbox

Print/export

Geyeria uruguayana is a moth in the Castniidae family. It is found in Uruguay, Argentina and southern Brazil.

The larvae have been recorded feeding on Eryngium paniculatum.

[edit]References

Wikispecies has information related to: Geyeria uruguayana

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Geyeria uruguayana

This article relating to superfamily Sesioidea is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

PLEASE CONTACT FOR PRICE LIST.

(for reference see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yogacharyan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Siddhai
http://www.astrology.site11.com http://www.bestastrologer.comuv.com/
http://www.indianastrologer.netii.net/
http://www.astrologer.netai.net http://vladimirafon.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/the-sage-of-barak-valley/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mqzy )

PLEASE CONTACT FOR PRICE LIST.

(for reference see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yogacharyan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Siddhai
http://www.astrology.site11.com http://www.bestastrologer.comuv.com/
http://www.indianastrologer.netii.net/
http://www.astrologer.netai.net http://vladimirafon.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/the-sage-of-barak-valley/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mqzy )

PLEASE CONTACT FOR PRICE LIST.

BOOKS BY DR.RUPAK NATH(DR.RUPNATHJI) ARE AS FOLLOWS (for reference see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Yogacharyan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Siddhai
http://www.astrology.site11.com http://www.bestastrologer.comuv.com/
http://www.indianastrologer.netii.net/
http://www.astrologer.netai.net http://vladimirafon.wordpress.com/2012/06/08/the-sage-of-barak-valley/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mqzy )

GLAM wiki

New Weekly Post goes up every Wednesday at 8:30PM EST

Where DO All Those Wiki Images Come From?

With all the high visibility litigation about artist’s copyright involving the (current) legal definitions of “In the Public Domain” and “Fair Use,” it’s important to explore the other side-what is being done to further public access to Art.

One of the most impressive and far-reaching efforts is Wikimedia Commons, a database of 12,808,932 freely usable media files to which anyone can contribute.

Wikimedia Commons was launched in September 2004 to provide a central repository for free photographs, diagrams, maps, videos, animations, music, sounds, spoken texts, and other free media. It is a multilingual project with contributors speaking dozens of languages, that serves as a central repository for all Wikimedia projects.

The project is growing rapidly. In September 2009, it reached five million multimedia files, less than six months after reaching four million. Wikimedia Commons received an honorary mention for Digital Community at the 2005 Prix Ars Electronica awards in May 2005.

The project has three community-driven mechanisms for highlighting quality contributions: Featured pictures which acknowledge the cream of the crop, and Quality images, which recognize well-composed creations by Wikimedia editors, and a Picture of the Year competition. The Picture of the Year competition has been run since Since 2006. The wider Wikimedia community is invited to share in the celebration of the inspiring free content imagery. Two pages, “Meet our photographers” and “Meet our illustrators”, showcase a selection of the highly skilled contributors who choose to use free content licenses and donate their work to the Wikimedia Commons.

GLAM-WIKI

The history and development of GLAM bears comment, as it has become the key of the program’s phenomenal success in securing cooperation and partnerships with some of the world’s greatest cultural institutions.

In 2010, Liam Wyatt, then Vice President of Wikimedia Australia, proposed a concept that seemed so bold, it required the British Museum to run a risk assessment before they’d agree to it. Liam suggested that he serve as the “Wikipedian in Residence,” a role that would allow him to put into practice the idea that cultural institutions should share their knowledge with Wikipedia. The British Museum agreed. That basic premise has turned into a global movement known as GLAM-WIKI.

Prior to Liam’s residency in June 2010, cultural institutions had donated images to Wikimedia Commons, but there had not yet been an institution that committed to establishing a relationship with the Wikimedia community. The concept of building a mutually beneficial cooperation is at the heart of the Wikipedian in Residence scheme.

Following the British Museum, the Wikipedian in Residence trend began to spread. The residency at The Children’s Museum of Indianapolis began in August 2010, followed in early 2011 with the Château de Versailles, Derby Museum and Art Gallery, and the Museu Picasso. By May 2011, two more major institutions joined in: the US National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the Smithsonian Institution’s Archives of American Art.

In July 2011, Daniel Mietchen became the Wikimedian in Residence on Open Science. Working with the Open Knowledge Foundation, this was the first residency to adapt the GLAM model to open science — an exciting advancement of the Wikipedian in Residence concept. More residencies began in late 2011, including the Israel Museum, and many are in the works for 2012 and beyond.

In an April 10, 2012 interview by Jefferson Bailey, Fellow at the Library of Congress’s Office of Strategic Initiatives, with Lori Phillips, the US Cultural Partnership Coordinator at the Wikimedia Foundation, GLAM-Wiki began to take off in the summer of 2010 following the first Wikipedian in Residence project at the British Museum.

Ms. Phillips said,

“I was involved in starting WikiProject Public Art, which aims to organize lists and create Wikipedia articles in order to, in essence, digitally preserve the artworks. GLAM-Wiki also uses the WikiProject model when organizing projects around specific institutions.”

Liam Wyatt, also popularized the term “GLAM” and convened the first GLAM-Wiki conference in Canberra, Australia. Soon after, a global community of Wikipedians united around the idea that cultural institutions should be sharing their resources with Wikipedia and began to establish models for doing this.

According to a recent article in Art Daily, GLAM-Wiki and the Walters Art Museum donated more than 19,000 freely-licensed images to Wikimedia.
.

Ms. Phillips said,

“The Walters has gone above and beyond throughout this collaboration with the
GLAM-Wiki community, working alongside Wikipedians to serve as a model for our mass image upload process,” said Ms. Phillips, US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator for the Wikimedia Foundation. “The release of these images will not only improve
articles in Wikipedia, but will also have the potential to be used freely throughout the web.”

Case Studies

The GLAM site includes 26 case studies including the British Museum, the German Federal Archives, Wikimedia Commons Germany, and the Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam.

Wikimedia France has signed an agreement with the Bibliothèque nationale de France to provide the French Wikisource with 1400 public domain texts that had been prepared for the library’s Gallica website.

Wikimedia Commons accepts only media
• that are explicitly freely licensed, or
• that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work.Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use justifications: see Commons: fair use.

All major projects of the Wikimedia Foundation are collaboratively developed by its users using the MediaWiki software. All contributions are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 (except Wikinews, which is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.5), meaning that their content may be freely used, freely edited, freely copied and freely redistributed subject to the restrictions of that license.

The Wiki Projects are an important addition to those efforts like the GoogleArt Project, dedicated to preserving the human cultural heritage. One has to wonder why so little use of them has been made by e-book publishers and authors.
————————————————————————————————————-
Note: Wiki makes it clear that,

“While other sites may also use MediaWiki software and therefore look similar to our projects, or may have a name that includes ‘Wiki-’ or ‘-pedia’, or a similar domain name, the only projects which are part of the Wikimedia Foundation are those listed below.”

Contents
1 Wikipedia
2 Wiktionary
3 Wikiquote
4 Wikibooks
5 Wikisource
6 Wikispecies
7 Wikinews
8 Wikiversity
9 Wikimedia Commons
10 MediaWiki

Biological nomenclature / binomial names / Linnaean taxonomy

At the NZETC we’ve been playing with adding biological nomenclature / binomial names / Linnaean taxonomy (take your pick of names, everyone else seems to) into our name authority system. Adding these would greatly assist the navigation of of texts on New Zealand plants and animals and they crop up with surprising frequency in our 19th Century novels collection (this was, after all the period when every educated person was reading and discussing Darwin). Such names would also hugely enable inter-linking with other content-rich partners, including Te Papa and the National Library.

As metadata binomial names have the huge advantage that when they’re coined uniqueness is their primary virtue. This doesn’t always work out, but there are few enough exceptions that they can be handled by hand (I know of no name clashes in New Zealand native or endemic flora or fauna, if you do, please let me know). Generally both the genus and species names are chosen as non-English (usually faux Latin) and unique in combination (ideally unique individually too). There is the odd fly in the ointment (Lens and Rhododendron are both genera which are also English words; species Apteryx haastii and Kiwialges haastii share a species name). In print binomial names are introduced with both the genus name and the species name, with the genus name capitalised and both italicised (or underlined, where italic fonts are unavailable, as is the case for type-written documents). Subsequent mentions of the name may have the genus name abbreviated to the single letter and a stop.

Of course, other text appears as pairs of italic words with at least the first one capitalised, which means that even in scientific and biological texts, only about half of those that match that regexp are binomial names. Removing the false positives could be done by hand, but by-and-large we’re a little busy for that, so it seems sensible to match the names to third party authorities (this has the added benefit that we can expose links to these authorities to the user too).

There are three classes of authority that I could check a list of candidate binomial names against, formal and informal:

• ‘A’ authorities are largely government funded projects aiming to synthesize existing taxonomic lists (which have typically been geographically or taxonomically specific) together into an über-list, acting as a thesaurus bridging the smaller lists. The best examples of ‘A’ authorities appear to be ITIS (which seems to be the central authority that all the other ‘A’ authorities match against and has a downloadable database) and uBio (which has a very useful range of tools and restrictive licencing). As a rule these are:

1. thesaurus based; they map names in one list onto names in other lists and allow for narrower/more specific terms
2. information poor; they contain little on no information other than the relationships between the names on the lists
3. link poor; they generally do a very poor job of providing real links into other system (the have search buttons which search for the binomial name in other systems, but without any certainty that the name is in
   the system).
4. jargon rich; they appear to be designed for practising scientists or systematists rather than average web users.

Internal Representation

Talking to Jamie (our local name-representation expert) about how to represent taxanomic names in EATS, there are two options:

1. create a separate authority for every publication that (re-)names a species.
2. create a single authority record (or reuse the existing
   NZETC one) and put the publication details in a note attached to the name, where possible we’d use the full reference.

The first is more semantically ”pure” and can potentially represent “he said, she said” disagreements (but would require development work to present these to users).

The second maps much more directly to what appears to be current practise in the field, is significantly easier from a technical and practical point of view and is significantly easier to map to external representations.

The second seems like the better option.

A single entity (representing a species) can have multiple names. One or more of the names would be of a specific type (‘scientific’?) which would be treated as a simple string (i.e. no worrying about genus name versus species name versus cultivar name), with an attached note giving the full reference (and potentially URL) to the publication describing it.

Entities can have multiple scientific names, representing historical or current disagreement, confusion or reclassification.

Scientific names can have multiple notes, representing re-description or reaffirmation of the name.

Entities can have links associated with them, for example the URLs of holotypes held by Te Papa, Te Ara entries, wikipedia entries or links into third party taxonomic tools.

Common names would be added as we usually do.

Each node in the taxonomic tree above (or below) the species level would also be an entity, which would have at least a name. It could potentially also have all the features of the species level, but this would be rarer.

Syftet är att samla information om allt liv. Än så länge finns hela 84 011 artiklar. Eller egentligen fler artiklar men 84 011 är så många som anses “legitimt” handla om djur.

Wikispecies har en bit att gå

För att vara brutalt uppriktigt så har Wikispecies en bra bit att gå för att vara användbar i samma dignitet som Wikipedia är idag i alla fall för mig. Men helt klart värd att marknadsföra här.