Template talk:Taxonomy/Sar

Requested move 20 April 2025

It has been proposed in this section that Template:Taxonomy/Sar be renamed and moved to Template:Taxonomy/SAR.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Template:Taxonomy/Sar → Template:Taxonomy/SAR – Recently I moved Template:Taxonomy/SAR to Template:Taxonomy/Sar because it was the only valid name. But people wanted to revert that (see User talk:Jako96#Please stop these edits). Jako96 (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This is the one move that is actually supported by the reference given in the taxonomy template. The taxon name Sar was introduced in 2012 as an emendation of SAR, which was introduced in 2008. As of 2019 (see Adl et al. 2019) and later, Sar is the formal name (e.g., Kaonashia insperata's parent taxa are written as "Eukarya, Sar, Stramenopiles" in its original taxonomic description). Of course this doesn't necessarily mean that the article title should be Sar; article names are best kept as the most common names, not necessarily the scientific names, just like we do Animal instead of Metazoa or Animalia. — Snoteleks (talk) 14:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I oppose myself too. Jako96 (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Snoteleks. Plantdrew (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]