Talk:Identification key

Copyright issues

I have two questions:

• Does it make sense to put identification keys into wikipedia? They could be on a separate site like "key (ants)" or "key to ant subfamilies" or the like. Or do they already exist, and is there a convention for the naming?
  • There is one on wiki-books, but it seems that it is almost never used or updated. 24.210.73.62 03:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
• To what extent can I just copy and paste keys from books or webpages. Can they be copyrighted? I mean, in the end, it is just plane information: "Is attribute X present or not". --Chrischan 17:05, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • The wording could in theory be copyrighted. 24.210.73.62 03:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The key on wikibooks is a true botanical key (i.e., meant for botanists), and not useful for the average user. SB Johnny 18:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

First sentence

An identification key does not need to be dichotomous, though it usually is. 24.210.73.62 03:18, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Broken Link

The link at the bottom "Thonner's analytical key to the families of flowering plants" is broken.

2 links removed. SB Johnny 18:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Merge Uses of Keys?

• Support (my suggestion). The information on that page would be good to have on this one. As a stand-alone article it will never attain good form. SB Johnny 18:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. User: Aozeba

OK, I did the merge. I also marked some areas where we need supporting references.Lisamh 18:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikibook of interest

See Dichotomous Key. --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 13:15, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Characteristics of good keys

This section contains some definitions, but says nothing about the characteristics of good keys. Mike Dallwitz 02:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

'Informal' and 'taxonomic' keys

I think the more usual terms are 'artificial' and 'natural'. For definitions, see, for example, 'Pankhurst, R.J. (1978). Biological identification. (Edward Arnold: London)'; and http://facstaff.unca.edu/tforrest/BIOL%20331%20Entomology/Handouts/The%20Key%20to%20a%20Useful%20Key.pdf. 'Taxonomic key' is usually used synonymously with 'identification key' - try a Google search for the former. Also, compare Google searches for "informal key" and "artificial key".

It isn't explained what use natural keys are - if any :-).

Mike Dallwitz 03:31, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Deleted links

"14:13, 20 February 2007 Curtis Clark - External links - Restore deleted links. Do not delete information without at least an edit summary, or better, a discussion on the talk page)"

Sorry. Here are the links I deleted, and my reasons for doing so.

ActKey. This is just one example of an interactive-key program. The link that I substituted, Programs for interactive identification and information retrieval, contains links to all general-purpose interactive-key programs; ActKey is among them.

Example of a key. This contains a single example of an interactive key. The software used is particularly poor, and there is no description of the software itself (e.g., what it is called, how it works, how to apply it to other data). You can find numerous much better examples of interactive keys at most of the interactive-key sites listed in the above page. If you want to link to examples of conventional (non-interactive) keys, there are countless ones on the Web.

Mike Dallwitz 11:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification!--Curtis Clark 15:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Distribution characters

I changed 'Distribution is not a character' to 'Distribution characters should be used with caution'. The place of origin of a specimen can (usually) be determined for a single specimen (unlike rarity, which is mentioned later in the section). Distribution is subject to errors, but so are all characters. Distribution is often very useful in identification. By reducing the number of other characters that need to be used, it can reduce the overall probability of error. For some references to error rates in keys, see Effectiveness of Identification Methods – References.

Mike Dallwitz 05:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Identification key. 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/20120629151733/http://www.eti.uva.nl/products/linnaeus.php to http://www.eti.uva.nl/products/linnaeus.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721001541/http://lis-upmc.snv.jussieu.fr/lis/?q=en%2Fresources%2Fsoftware%2Fxper2 to http://lis-upmc.snv.jussieu.fr/lis/?q=en%2Fresources%2Fsoftware%2Fxper2

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 11:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

A device? and where are the diagrams?

Why Identification key is considered a "device" rather than a drawing? And why don't we have any simple diagram showing what an Identification key may look like? --138.75.40.159 (talk) 16:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)