• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Gallery searches for species whith changed scientific name (1 Viewer)

Alan Manson

KwaZulu-Natal birder
Opus Editor
Gallery searches from opus remain difficult for species whith changed scientific names. This includes species where a wrong spelling of a scientific name was widely used (see HelenB's thread), or where the scientific name has changed recently (HelenB's thread and njlarsen's post on Andy's "Gallery Photo Search" sticky). I have used an inelegant solution on the Opus page for Gabar Goshawk. However, this probably does not meet Green Fields' requirement that "if the way the gallery searching is changed again, we can update the template and every link will be 'ok' again."

I suggest that the GSearch template be changed so that the botton created by {{GSearch|GENUS+SP}} reads "Search for more photos of this species in the BirdForum gallery using GENUS SPECIES" instead of "Search for more photos of this species in the BirdForum gallery". This would allow Opus editors to create two or more Gallery Search buttons with different scientific names for each species, and searchers would know what string they are using for each search. Hopefully such a change is possible, and should not require re-editing of most Opus pages.
 
Last edited:
I just looked at your page for the Gabar Goshawk. The one improvement you could make as I see it would be to add text so that both entries show what one is searching with when clicking them.

I for one would support the notion that if technically possible, the search term be displayed by the GSearch template.

Niels
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top