Talk:Blond capuchin

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2021 and 6 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jcreeggan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Rename the scientific name?

According to Marcelo M. de Oliveira und Alfredo Langguth: Rediscovery of Marcgrave's Capuchin Monkey and Designation of a Neotype for Simia flavia Schreber 1774 (Primates, Cebidae). In: Boletim do Museu Nacional 523 (2006), S. 1-16 PDF and IUCN Entry the species should be renamed Cebus flavius. Regards --80.108.59.151 (talk) 21:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC) (de:Benutzer:Bradypus)

Perhaps, but not yet. We should wait for a secondary source that is noted for taxonomy to support the notion. There are several changes when you look at the IUCN, but many primatologists don't like the changes they made. We should wait for something more official. - UtherSRG (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Anthony B. Rylands and Russell A. Mittermeier's “The diversity of the New World primates (Platyrrhini): An annotated taxonomy”, in South american primates: Comparative perspectives in the study of behavior, ecology, and conservation, ed. by Paul A. Garber et al. (2009, ISBN 978-0-387-78704-6, pp. 3–54) insisted, “Cebus queirozi, recently described in Pontes, Marta and Asfora (2006) is evidently a junior synonym of C. flavius, or, as argued by Oliveira and Langguth (2006), unavailable for lack of a registered type specimen” (p. 37, bold added). The necessity to rename this species' specific name is supported by their chapter. (Moreover, although this is something of my own, I heard the name of C. flavius in an academic talk on the observation of them in their wild habitat, not on the mere taxonomic study.) So I also propose renaming their scientific name. --Shaxshan (talk) 08:28, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Oops! Just now I noticed this citation is the same as in the IUCN entry! Rylands and Mittermeier are the evaluators. However, I still propose the above-mentioned. --Shaxshan (talk) 08:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blond capuchin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205133225/http://acd.ufrj.br/~museuhp/CP/Bol-Zool/BolZool2006/Bol%20Zool%20MN%20523.pdf to http://acd.ufrj.br/~museuhp/CP/Bol-Zool/BolZool2006/Bol%20Zool%20MN%20523.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150226082115/http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19113390/1559919033/name/jbi_2609_Rev_EVcorrectedproof.pdf to http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19113390/1559919033/name/jbi_2609_Rev_EVcorrectedproof.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:13, 22 July 2017 (UTC)