Adding links to new sources in the "References" section

Community and Forum → Discussions on the website functionality → Adding links to new sources in the "References" section

Vasiliy Feoktistov, 18.04.2015 10:04

Please pay attention to anyone who adds to the sources from time to time.
Important !!! It is necessary to add a link to on the site itself .
And not on the species, genus, or other taxon information contained on this source.
Because of the addition of later confusion.For example, a single source, which exists now on the site already in several versions add:
Invalid added:
1. Butterflies and Moths of the World Generic Names and their Type-species. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/research/projects/butmoth/search/GenusDetails.dsml?NUMBER=26690.0&AUTHOR=Schoorl&beginIndex=22&listPageURL=GenusList2.dsml%3FAUTHOR%3DSchoorl&searchPageURL=BrowseAuthors.dsml%3FAUTHOR%3DSchoorl%26beginIndex%3D5. [137]
2. www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/research/projects/butmoth/search/GenusDetails.dsml?NUMBER=28859.0&&. [108]
Go to these links and you will realize why.It is true the source added is on the site at number 36 and looks like: [36] Natural History Museum (nhm.ac.uk), 2011 .
Correct link to this source: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/ and nothing more.
Indeed an important question. there are difficulties and confusion with the addition of new taxa to the site if you want to rely on this source.Peter will have to somehow go through the source and remove all the excess out)))

Comments

18.04.2015 20:11, Vasiliy Feoktistov

The information about the add, I think it is not necessary.
Pinpoint problem correctly adding sources and really need not to duplicate the same sources several times.
Stepping on a rake these today, when I was doing this kind: http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/120686.Accumulated in the nhm and jumped several references to the same source the result is obvious ...... (((
Peter, where I wrote that it is necessary to correct (to put in the correct form).
The essence of the problem simply is that links should not be given to the types and so forth. Contained on this source, and must be given the source itself. Once: the first (also the last)))).Doubles are not needed: they only bring confusion.
P.S. Technically soblyudeie that likely could not be implemented so that only the notorious "human factor".