Talk:Icius insolidus

Etymology

Fernández-Rubio (2013) has unfortunately duplicated the correct explanation of the etymology of the genus name Idiops as the etymology of Icius, the entry above. The genus Icius was named by Simon (1876:54);[1] in a footnote he says "Le mot Icelus, faisant double emploi, nous avon dû le remplacer" (the word Icelus, having double use, we had to replace it). Icelus was a genus named by Koch. So is Icius just a combination of letters different from Icelus without meaning? Peter coxhead (talk) 08:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: Interesting. There seems to be contemporary debate around the site of Julius Cesar's Icius Pontus,[2] with Boulogne being seemingly preferred,[3] so maybe that was the inspiration for the name. Fernández-Rubio states that the latter part of Psuedicius, dicius (δικαίος), is translated justo, honrado, which means fair or honest.[4] I cannot find a reliable source for a link between either of these and the genus so including them would, I believe, unfortunately be OR. simongraham (talk) 08:18, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham: I think Fernández-Rubio is simply wrong to decompose Psuedicius into Psuedo-+dicius. It's clearly meant to be Pseudo-+Icius, i.e. the false genus Icius. I fear it reinforces my doubts about his paper. It's not reliable to guess at the components of complex scientific names without looking to see whether the original author gave any explanation. (See, e.g., Tarantula#The element pelma in genus names. Cardiopelma doesn't mean something like 'heart-shaped foot'.) Peter coxhead (talk) 09:33, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simon doesn't explain what the "double use" is, but Icelus is a fish genus named in 1845, so has priority. (Koch used the genus Icelus in a species name in 1846, giving a diagnosis for the genus itself in 1850.) But would Simon have known about the fish genus? Peter coxhead (talk) 11:33, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Simon, Eugène (1876), Les arachnides de France, vol. 3, Paris: Roret, p. 54
  2. ^ Merridew, H. M.; Hinchliffe, R. B. (1873), Merridew's Illustrated Guide to Boulogne-sur-Mer, London: Simpkin, Marshall & Co, p. 3
  3. ^ Dezobry, Bachelet (1873), Dictionnaire général de biographie et d'histoire de mythologie, de géographie ancienne et moderne comparée, vol. 1, Paris: Libraire Ch Delagrave, p. 348
  4. ^ Fernández-Rubio, Fidel (2013). "La etimología de los nombres de las arañas (Araneae)" [The etymology of the names of spiders (Araneae)] (PDF). Revista ibérica de Aracnología (in Spanish) (22): 128. ISSN 1576-9518. Retrieved 2025-02-22.

Placement of some taxonomy information

The second paragraph of the Taxonomy section would, I think, be better at the genus article, Icius, as it's not confined to this species. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Icius article could definitely be expanded with this information, and more. simongraham (talk) 08:18, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Icius insolidus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 22:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 11:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Reading now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • The female abdomen has a vague leaf-like pattern on it. – This is a bit unclear in the lead. Is the pattern also white, like the stripe? Does the pattern exist in addition to the stripe, or instead of it? Are you talking about the upper side or the underside?
    • Clarified.
  • Can "tooth" be linked or explained, as it is not clear what it means in this context (I guess, simply "projection"?)
    • I read that it is a large tooth. I cannot find a relevant article beyond that on chelicerae, which is already linked.
  • This genus name derives from two Greek words, meaning certainly and diurnal. – This information is not strictly pertinent to this article since the genus has its own article and this species is no longer part of it, but if you keep it, consider providing the Greek words you are talking about.
    • Removed the etymology of Menemerus.
  • More important would be an etymology for the current genus, Icius. Anything on this in the sources?
    • Yes. Added Icius instead of Menemerus.
  • chelicerae – link
    • Added.
  • palpal bulb – link and/or explain
    • Linked.
  • pedipalp tibia – same
    • Added explanation as I cannot find an article.
  • In general, it makes sense to, in addition to the wikilink, provide a brief explanation of the terms that are most critical for the text, per WP:MTAU.
    • Added explanation of epigyne and pedipalps.
  • You consistently spell it maxilae, but shouldn't it be maxillae? (with two l)?
    • It should. Corrected.
  • insemination ducts – link and/or explain
    • Unfortunately I cannot find a relevant article so have rephrased the sentence.
  • Icius insolidus is externally typical of the genus. – difficult to understand. Do you mean that the external morphology is typical?
    • Yes. Rephrased.
  • Can we specify whether the individual shown in the image is male or female?
    • The caption in INaturalist does not specify, but from the description I believe it is male. Added.
  • An additional sentence on the nests could be helpful. Is that made out of spider silk?
    • Added.
  • The holotype is marked that it was discovered in Kimberley in South Africa. – Confusing. Has it a mark saying it was discovered in Kimberley, or is it notable for this discovery? If the former, I would just write "The holotype was discovered in Kimberley in South Africa".
    • Amended.
  • That's all. I did a copy edit, feel free to revert if needed. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.