Talk:Invertebrate iridescent virus 31

Viruses Low‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses 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.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Arthropods Low‑importance

	Arthropods portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arthropods, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of arthropods 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.ArthropodsWikipedia:WikiProject ArthropodsTemplate:WikiProject ArthropodsArthropods
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 29 May 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Iridovirus armadillidium1. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Requested move 29 May 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 00:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invertebrate iridescent virus 31 → Iridovirus armadillidium1 – Renamed by ICTV in 2023. https://ictv.global/taxonomy/taxondetails?taxnode_id=202306334&taxon_name=Iridovirus%20armadillidium1 Grey Clownfish (talk) 09:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 07:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative support. The ICTV has renamed (almost) all virus species in the last few years. Virus species names now follow a binomial format; they are now exactly two words, with the first word being the genus. Wikipedia has a little over 1000 articles on virus species; almost all of them are now using old names that are not binomial. I think a broader discussion on how to title articles on virus species now is warranted. Plantdrew (talk) 16:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. One thing I should note is that many articles are titled with common names rather than scientific names. Outdated scientific names could arguably be considered common names, or at least akin to common names and therefore continue to be used. In fact, some plant genera names were borrowed into English and those names still get used for species formerly classified in those genera as a result.

I think this may be comparable to the renaming of Twitter to X. The argument for retaining the Twitter title is that despite it no longer being the official name, it's still the usual name. I've seen that the use of some of these new virus names is almost nonexistent. I think moving is not warranted in those cases. And this is one of those cases. We certainly need to use the new names in any place in which current scientific names are expected, like the taxobox though, but this doesn't necessarily include the title.

I proposed this move because I wasn't really thinking through it and I wasn't sure if it should be moved. Only when writing this am I realising that this move is not warranted yet, if it ever will be. Grey Clownfish (talk) 04:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Grey Clownfish:, I've opend a broader discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Viruses#Titles_for_species_articles. Plantdrew (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2024 (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.

Goals for this article

This article should add elements about how the virus is transmitted, specifics about how it affects the mortality and behavior of hosts, and the evolutionary benefit to the iridescence. From what I have read it is possible that the iridescence makes the isopod more likely to be eaten and therefore transmitted to another organism. Dimitri Isov9 (talk) 20:30, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]