Talk:Taxonomy mnemonic

Tree of Life Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tree of Life, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of taxonomy and the phylogenetic tree of life on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tree of LifeWikipedia:WikiProject Tree of LifeTemplate:WikiProject Tree of Lifetaxonomic articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

I added a link to this page from the entry on "Taxonomy", which introduces the system of taxonomic ranks but did not refer to mnemonic devices for remembering that list. I also added a link from "Linnaean taxonomy." This was in response to the statement that this entry is an "orphan."Davidlchandler (talk) 20:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other languages?

Im wondering if other languages' zoology mnemonics could be added here? There is a rather good one in Hungarian that I could add, if no one has any objections. SpecB (talk) 18:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is the English version of Wikipedia, only English zoology mnemonics should be listed on this page. Therefore, it would be best to link the page to the Hungarian language Zoology mnemonic article in the Hungarian language version of Wikipedia. Figaro (talk) 15:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)hjhhhh[reply]

Useless Separation?

I fail to understand the differentiation being made between 'Zoological' and 'Biological' mnemonics because in both sections the key-letters that are used to form the mnemonic are identical. Why isn't there just a list of mnemonics? User:NDrez 29 September 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by NormDrez (talk • contribs) 15:56, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because the 'zoological' mnemonics have zoological phrases - and the 'biology' mnemonics do not. This is a 'Zoology mnemonic' page which was intended especially for zoology phrases (i.e. animal phrases - not human phrases). Because the 'biology mnemonics' (mostly about 'King Philip' / 'King Phillip") are not zoological in nature, they are represented in a special biology section on the page.

Also, there are other pages on Wikipedia with what you suggested - listings of an assortment of mnemonics. Figaro (talk) 21:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Change in scope and example

I'm sorry, but zoology mnemonics, as this article was attempting to scope them, aren't a thing. There are many KPCOFGS mnemonics, but ones that specifically incorporate animal terms are rare. There are also mnemonics which include domain, subspecies, or the botanical use of division instead of phylum. I've cut out a bunch of examples with no web presence, and changed the illustrated example to "King Phillip came over for good spaghetti". That is not the particular mnemonic I learned as a child, but it seems to have more presence (citable to multiple books) than any of the others that were included here.

And after some reflection, it seems to me to be pedagogically superior to the alternatives (especially the strained attempts to put the name of an animal somewhere in the mnemonic). "King" is a big clue to the first term. The "Ph" blend in Phillip/Phylum is pronounced quite differently than most other instances of "P". I'm seeing that both "soup" and "spaghetti" are common for the last term, but spaghetti preserves the "Sp" of species.

"King Penguins congregate on frozen ground sometimes" manages to get almost all of the initial phonetics wrong, and is rare. The only reason I've left it near the top is a supposed citation to the Queensland Museum that I have been unable to verify. Plantdrew (talk) 02:41, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ideas for expansion of the page

1. Issues with these mnemonics. As noted in the talk page, some do not actually replicate phonemes, just letters. Further, they do not explain the other classification levels such as tribe, subspecies, variety, or cultivar.

2. Rise in popularity of mnemonics. When did these start becoming popular? What is their original source? Can it even be determined?

3. What links to this page, and what NEEDS to link to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prometheus720 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]