View source for Talk:Mite

{{GA|06:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)|oldid=811720093|topic=Biology and medicine|page=1}} 
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Arthropods|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Veterinary medicine|importance=low}}
}}
{{DYK talk|30 December|2017|entry= ... that relative to its length, one species of '''[[mite]]''' is the fastest animal on Earth?|nompage=Template:Did you know nominations/Mite}}

==Untitled==
I don't believe this belongs in the category "pesticide" So I will remove the reference.

== Merge ==
{{archive top|This is an ancient discussion that was had 17 years ago. [[Acari]] has been redirected to mite for a while now. There is nothing else to do here. [[User:Hemiauchenia|Hemiauchenia]] ([[User talk:Hemiauchenia|talk]]) 05:58, 3 July 2023 (UTC)}}
Shouldn't ''[[Mite]]'' be merged into ''[[Acarina]]'' and not the reverse? All mites are Acarina, but not all Acarina are mites (see [[ticks]]). It would therefore make more sense to expand the [[Acarina]] article and merge the [[mite]] one into it. --[[User:IronChris|IronChris]] 18:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

No merge. Acarina are mite AND ticks. You don't want to merge all three. `'[[user:mikkalai|mikka]] [[user talk:mikkalai|(t)]] 21:41, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

:I was just saying that because someone proposed a merge. I am aware of the importance of each, but I hope you'll agree with me, the [[Acarina]] article is simply ridiculous. One line on a whole order! So if no merge is done it would be great if someone with sufficient knowledge could expand it. --[[User:IronChris|IronChris]] 22:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
::Well, I added the second one :-) And while doing so I've found there '''is''' something to write into it, but I'd rather not. 
::On the other hand, it really makes sense to merge [[Acariformes]], [[Parasitiformes]], and  [[Opilioacariformes]] into it, since the all of them must be discussed together because of some controversy as to their taxonomies. `'[[user:mikkalai|mikka]] [[user talk:mikkalai|(t)]] 23:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
:::I believe [[Mite]] should be merged into [[Acarina]]; according to the [[Encarta]] article on [http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761560961/Tick.html#s3 Tick], they are actually a group of mites, making "mite" synonymous with "Acarina". --[[User:Crustaceanguy|Crustaceanguy]] 18:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
:::: Searching the corresponding page in french I found no one. But i don't undersatnd here where do mite the domain of mites end in the ''Acari'' taxon... What are exactly mites ? All ''Acari'' except ticks ? What is the minimal descriptio of a mite ? --[[Special:Contributions/82.241.178.233|82.241.178.233]] ([[User talk:82.241.178.233|talk]]) 17:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
:::::Well simply they are parasites, ticks and mites which are far far smaller than ticks are still a parasite in some cases burrow into your skin lay their eggs unlike ticks where you pull them off and leave their heads buried in where they can grow another body inside that wound. Either way, they're parasites. And if you disclude them then nobody will know about them when they look at that article . Even though there is one line, it still brings attention to them to where you can find out more about them in other areas. It's best to leave it merged. [[Special:Contributions/107.184.107.254|107.184.107.254]] ([[User talk:107.184.107.254|talk]]) 05:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}

==Is there??==

Is there a way to keep mites off of you? I stuck my hand in a [[Starling]]'s nest, and I got a bunch of mites...

thanks,
--[[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">e</span>]]. 01:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

 5% permethrin cream by prescription only in USA or over the counter in Canada- anonymous

 Don't put your hand in starling's nests. - anaon  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/80.189.13.166|80.189.13.166]] ([[User talk:80.189.13.166|talk]]) 19:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Yes, benzyl benzoate can really help. Sulphur is also useful, eg: 10% sulphur soap. Food grade diatomaceous earth also helps. A good [[IGR]] and knockdown painted on your house walls every 2 weeks or so until they are gone. Mites that infest humans are very hard to get rid of.

[[Special:Contributions/1.41.43.196|1.41.43.196]] ([[User talk:1.41.43.196|talk]]) 16:28, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I have just added some information about sulphur - the ancient remedy for mites. 
It should probably be noted that tea tree oil, neem oil, orange oil, eucalyptus oil and lavender oil are also known agents of mite destruction and repelling. In addition, alcohol, including [[methylated spirits]], also kills mites. Rinsing the microfibre clothes in [[ammonia]] (15% to 20% NH<sub>3</sub> to total volume of water used) is one of the few ways to effectively kill mites on microfibre mop heads and microfibre cloths. 

It should also be noted that mites are extremely difficult to clean up. One of the few ways to clean a house is to use [[microfibre]] cloths to wipe walls, ceilings and any hard surfaces. Just about anything else won't actually pick the mites up.

It should also be stated somewhere here that standard pest control knockdowns such as Delta Force Plus<ref>http://www.epestsupplies.com.au/index.php?cat_id=21&id=264&pgid=4&mode=view_details&rec=0&next=1</ref> is only 80% effective and mite populations can quickly adapt.
In addition, [[Insect growth regulator]]s such as [[Starycide]] or [[Nylar]] are used to control a mite population.
You can kill two birds with one stone by mixing an IGR into your mop bucket and wiping your walls with a microfibre mop. The mop picks up mites from the wall, the IGR peter pan's them, and the water drowns them. 
Always have two microfibre mop heads - leave the second one in the bucket and swap them. That way the mites get more time to die in the mop bucket. 

If you buy a knockdown with deltamethrin then getting one with piperonyl butoxide helps for mite control. 

[[Special:Contributions/49.178.3.93|49.178.3.93]] ([[User talk:49.178.3.93|talk]]) 12:58, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

The fastest ways to get mites off your skin are:
* Hot shower - preferably with sulphur soap
* Dip a baby wipe into eucalyptus oil, then wipe across your skin. The mites will be stunned and picked up. You may need to use more than one wipe to get them all. Tea tree oil also works
* Cover your skin with [[benzyl benzoate]]. The mites will either leave or die. Some people apply this daily for months to get rid of bird mites.
* Cover your skin with petroleum jelly. The mites will be smothered. Note that this won't kill them instantly. It can take 10 to 20 minutes for them to die die die.
* Cover your skin in baby oil. 
* Hot bath - preferably with epsom salts, tar based bath oil, or similar. The hotter the better - no cold water.
* Cover your skin in powdered sulphur. A very long time ago people used to smother their skin in sulphur, wrap rags around, then sleep. You can also walk around during the day with sulphur in your pockets and on your skin
* Smother your skin in [[Deep Heat]] - Only if DESPERATE .. or if you have been bitten too much and can't sleep for the pain.
* 80% [[deet]] products<ref>http://www.bushman-repellent.com</ref>
* [[Nit]] products

Any of the above to be executed with due care for your health. Seek medical advice. This information is only given as a guide. Anything you put on your skin you are potentially absorbing into your body. Be careful with any type of poison and avoid long term use of chemicals if you can. 

Also note that [[Telfast]] and other similar drugs can be useful in controlling the reaction humans have to bird mite bites.. however it is not recommended. Use sparingly if at all. See a doctor. 

There are various healing and soothing creams and ointments markets for psoriasis, baby rash and skin rash which can really help deal with the damage caused by bird mite bites.

{{reflist-talk}}

== 45 000 ==

Does the number 45 000 refer to the number of identified species, or the total number of species anticipated to exist (out of which we seems to have found 5&nbsp;%)? [[Special:Contributions/User:Mikez|\]][[User:Mikez|Mike]][[User talk:Mikez|(z)]] 10:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

:Yes, please, this needs clarification! --[[User:345Kai|345Kai]] 23:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
::Done; 45,000 refers to the number of named species, there are many many more undescribed. [[User:IronChris|'''Iron''']][[User:IronChris/Esperanza|<span style="color:green;">'''C'''</span>]][[User:IronChris|'''hris''']]  |  [[User talk:IronChris|(talk)]] 00:40, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

== Mite: Currency ==

Hi Everyone- I need to learn more about the Mite currency (an old form of currency from maybe 2000 years ago in the Middle East).  I am not sure how to do it, but there needs to be some reference to this old currency here so that Mite (the insect) is not the only option for the users.  Also, It doesn't appear that an article on Mites (currency) exists.  Thanks.

Edit: I just found a reference to the mite currency in the [[Greek lepton]] article.  Thanks.

== More ==

Any experts out there? This article is close to a stub.

Why do there have to be pictures? Ugh, I have those things in me right now, thank you very much!  <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.36.89.42|24.36.89.42]] ([[User talk:24.36.89.42|talk]]) 04:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Haha, I know.  It's very easy to get skeeved out by these things. [[User:KenFehling|KenFehling]] ([[User talk:KenFehling|talk]]) 07:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

== birdmites ==

Anyone care to add information on birdmites? There is some scary information on birdmites.org and not sure how much of it is true, as it is commercially backed.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.201.77.54|76.201.77.54]] ([[User talk:76.201.77.54|talk]]) 05:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
agreed  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/174.34.161.130|174.34.161.130]] ([[User talk:174.34.161.130|talk]]) 02:44, 27 December 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Quite a bit of it is true, unfortunately. Bird mites are hard to kill, hard to control, resistant to most pesticides and can ruin your life. 
Another problem is lack of recognition. Very few experts care to study the problem, and most will adamantly state that bird mites (and other mites) can not infest humans - usually quoting nonsense about mites not being able to bite through human skin and not liking human blood. Both of these assumptions are wrong. Fortunately this attitude is changing, slowly.

Ivermectin may help. See birdmites.org for a start on combating this problem. Shanspirations for a second. A cure was found a long time ago - benzyl benzoate. Acts as both an insecticide and as a repellent. Combined with diatomaceous earth and sulphur along with the same precautions and solution for treating scabies bird mites can be controlled and eliminated.
  
[[Special:Contributions/1.41.43.196|1.41.43.196]] ([[User talk:1.41.43.196|talk]]) 16:36, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

[[Borax]],  [[lye]], [[sulphur]], [[alcohol]], [[ammonia]] and [[menthol]] have been used for centuries to deal with mite infestations. Lye and ammonia are used to clean the environment where mites live which walls, ceilings, floors; alcohol is used as a contact poison to kill mites; sulphur in powdered form is used as a repellent and contact killer, in the environment sulphur is dusted onto walls and into cracks, for humans sulphur is dusted onto the skin and covered with clothes to trap in the sulphur and force contacts with mites; borax is either spread around the environment as a powder or mixed with water sprayed onto the environment including walls, ceilings and floors to contact kill and build up layers of poison. Menthol crystals are evaporated to form a gas toxic to mites. 

The main issues with these chemicals are:
* Sulphur has a recognisable irritating odour, may stain clothes and is slow to act; on the positive side sulphur can last a long time 
* Lye is an irritant which must be used with great care and can damage skin; on the positive side lye is cheap and easy to use
* Ammonia can irritate air passages and damage human skin
* Alcohol evaporates too quickly to be anything more than a temporary measure against an infestation; on the plus side kill rate is very high and at rates which do not damage human skin
* Menthol crystals are expensive; on the positive side menthol crystals can be placed into a container to kills mites where mites are infesting human clothes, books or other objects
* Borax dissolved in water must be continually applied in layers to ensure contact with mites; on the positive side borax is cheap, and when mixed with water can be sprayed in all areas of a house including carpets to kill mites and form a protective barrier against an infestation with little side effects on humans  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/58.108.147.30|58.108.147.30]] ([[User talk:58.108.147.30|talk]]) 06:19, 26 August 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Had an infestation of bird mites in our house (originated from a bird dying in a dryer vent), and it lasted for months. Could feel them crawling on us immediately after a shower and had bites across my upper chest, shoulders, and back. Put diatomaceous earth on everything, wrapped upholstered furniture in plastic and washed all clothing and bedding daily. Used menthol, lavender,and more. What helped the most was using an enzyme cleaner (we used Kleen Green Naturally) to spray all walls, floors, furniture surfaces and our bodies after showers. Experts consulted at the time were of no help.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.115.221.79|76.115.221.79]] ([[User talk:76.115.221.79|talk]]) 04:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

There is a listing a treatments at: http://www.AfterMite.com

The problem with focusing on just a few treatments is that bird mites adapt and can double their population within a week.  If they have burrowed into your skin, you need to attack them Internally as well as Externally.  There is a great deal of info at AfterMite.

== mite cells ==

Some of these are so small they would only be a few cells wide; so does anyone have any idea how many cells they've got and how big they are. Some live in/on insects as parasites. From the data given if a bee was a long as a human, some mites would be as long as a bee (ie about 100x shorter in length). 

So if typical animal cell is a about 0.01 mm across, how many cells can it fit in (or are they much tinier cells than average)?

== Language links ==

I've just tried to add a link from this page to de:Milben. But I can't, because Milben is already linked from Acari. I don't have time to figure out the details of yet another wikisomething. Does somebody want to figure out how to make this work? [[User:GyroMagician|GyroMagician]] ([[User talk:GyroMagician|talk]]) 10:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

==Copyright issues (resolved)==
*Before starting to expand this article, I put it through the Earwig copyvio detector and got worrying results, so I sought advice from the Copyright problems noticeboard. I asked "How can I tell whether the article is copying the websites concerned or vice-versa?" [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) 09:01, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2017_September_27  This is the response I received] - 

:*Re: the Flickr match, our article text appears to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mite&oldid=524790706 predate] the Flickr upload, so we're good there. Re: the .gr match, the site looks dodgy which immediately set off alarm bells for a likely backwards copy.  If you look in the history of the article, you can see that the en.wiki text evolved to the text of that website -- [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mite&diff=prev&oldid=610852263 this diff] and the subsequent diff (and possibly other diffs as well).  So we're good there. The PRweb match is just a spam link at the bottom of the article (which I just removed) so we're good there too. In short, you can go ahead and expand the article without worrying about the potential copyright violations identified by the Earwig copyvio detector. [[User:Calliopejen1|Calliopejen1]] ([[User talk:Calliopejen1|talk]]) 23:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

{{Talk:Mite/GA1}}

== WP:VET ==

This is one of the most popular pages in [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicine]]'s scope.  Very few editors watch WT:VET's pages, which means that questions may not be answered in a timely manner.  If you are an active editor and interested in animals or veterinary medicine, please put WT:VET on [[Help:Watchlist|your watchlist]].  Thank you,  [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:59, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

== Language links ==

I noticed many language links are missing in the sidebar (e.g. French, Spanish, German). Seems to be because Wikidata has different entries for Mite and Acari. I don't know how to fix this. [[Special:Contributions/82.5.226.54|82.5.226.54]] ([[User talk:82.5.226.54|talk]]) 20:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
: I don't think this is fixable. Wikidata only allows one-to-to correspondence between an article and wikidata items, which determines the interlanguage links. This page would have to be linked to {{wdq|Q19137}} to pick up a more comprehensive collection of interlanguage links. You can see the interlanguage links at the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acari&redirect=no Acari] redirect. I don't think this can be solved without a change in Wikidata structure or coordination of article names between different language Wikipedias. {{ping|Peter coxhead}} any thoughts? —&nbsp;<span style="font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;">&nbsp;[[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]&nbsp;&#124;[[User talk:Jts1882|&nbsp;talk]]&nbsp;</span> 10:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
::{{ping|Jts1882}} unfortunately, the same thoughts as always, since this is the same old problem. Because Wikidata only allows 1:1 correspondence between articles and its items, when Wikidata has more than one item to which an article could be linked, all that can be done is to make a choice: we can either link this article from {{Q|19137}} or from {{Q|2441993}} but not both. Personally, I would change to {{Q|19137}}, since this is what the taxonbar uses.
::Now that Wikidata allows links to redirects, I assume it would be possible for the Wikimedia software to pick up other language links by finding what redirects to this article and finding what Wikidata item they are linked from. However, this depends on the redirects being genuine synonyms (either taxonomic or general), and wouldn't be right for cases like species redirects to genus. [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 06:20, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
::: {{ping|Peter coxhead}} I agree that {{wdq|19137}} would be better for interlanguage links. I did think of that change, but didn't want to upset the logic of the [[mite]] article linking to {{wdq|2441993}} and the [[Acari]] redirect linking to {{wdq|19137}}, especially after the fight to get Wikidata to allow linking of redirects.
::: When I was writing the code for test interlanguage link taxonbar, I did wonder if there was potential for a gadget for "extended interlanguage links". But how to get the appropriate wikidata items? One can look for redirects but, as you indicate, how to pick the right ones? Check for synonym properties? I suppose it would be possible to get the wikidata items from the taxonbar. —&nbsp;<span style="font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;">&nbsp;[[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]&nbsp;&#124;[[User talk:Jts1882|&nbsp;talk]]&nbsp;</span> 07:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Jts1882}} yes, it's tricky, because it depends on editors, either at Wikidata or here, correctly setting up the taxonomic synonyms. Here you'd need to see {{tlx|R from alternative scientific name}}, I think. In theory you could use the properties of the Wikidata item, but these are not often set up correctly or helpfully in my experience. For example, [[wikidata:Property:P694]] would have to be taken into account, but this rarely present when it should be, and the reverse seems to be indicated by "subject has role" {{Q|Q15709329}} "of". I doubt that the results would be reliable in many cases. [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 06:19, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
::::: One approach would be to check redirects with badge "sitelink to redirect" or "intentional sitelink to redirect. So [[Acari]] redirects to [[mite]] and the sitelink for  {{wdq|19137}} has the badge "intentional sitelink to redirect". This is something Wikimedia could use. 
::::: For a potential gadget the easiest might be to get the {{para|from}} parameters from the taxonbar using the API (e.g. search <code>hastemplate:taxonbar insource:/axonbar *\| *from *=/</code> the current page). 
::::: Anyway, I don't think this too useful. It wouldn't help a reader searching for interlanguage links and we already know how to get the information. —&nbsp;<span style="font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;">&nbsp;[[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]&nbsp;&#124;[[User talk:Jts1882|&nbsp;talk]]&nbsp;</span> 09:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

== Article [[Apalotacarus]] ==

Greetings, today I asked for Arthropods expert help at Apalotacarus article - Check taxon, de-orphan article. Posted here hoping to find someone with knowledge about this subject. Regards, [[User:JoeNMLC|JoeNMLC]] ([[User talk:JoeNMLC|talk]]) 20:53, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

== Interlinking, Wikidata and various merged articles ==

I see that '''interlang linking is broken for years''' ({{ping|Jts1882}}, {{ping|Peter coxhead}}), and I'd like to ask for a little help, or insights.

There seem to be some entities related to this article:
* Acari (most international articles about "mite" links there: 84), [[d:Q19137]], it seems that this entity (taxon) ''has no common name in most of the languages'' and actually is a ''superclass'' of what most of articles talk about;
* Mite (sometimes linked to: 24) [[d:Q2441993]], this is what everyone calls them, and describe them;
* Acariformes [[d:Q1341457]] and Parasitiformes [[d:Q132756]] (and a ''lot'' of others), also having ''no common name''.

The relations seems to be
* Acari[taxon] ''--'''child''' taxon-->'' Acariformes[taxon]; Parasitiformes[taxon] (and other 24 taxons)
* Acari[taxon] ''--'''subclass'''-->'' Mite[common name/paraphylecic group] (no other direct subclasses)

If I see history correctly there has been a ''Mite'' article (common name), and links were happy. Then ''Mite'' has been renamed/merged into ''Acari'' (to follow the taxon titles instead of common names, though I'm not positive this have added real value), but people complained that that's not correct since other language ''mites'' link to its '''superclass''' ''Acari'', so they have created a redirect from ''Acari'' to ''Mite'', linking to a new wikidata entry ("mite"), and keeping the old ("acari") behind the redirect. The result is that ''Mite'' articles (which usually cover ''subclasses'' of ''Acari'' [namely "mites"] but not ''Acari'' itself) link to ''Acari'' (probably incorrectly?), which is a redirect to it's internalguage links are hidden from the readers.

I am not entirely sure how many languages have articles on ''Acari'' (instead if its subclass, ''Mite'')? Is there any of their ''Mite'' articles actually describe the superclass? I guess not a lot, but I am really not qualified.

If I understand correctly '''the solution would be to relink all the Mite articles from wd:Acari to wd:Mite''', and manually move any which covers Acari instead of Mite, if there is such at all (but it'd be pointless since the interlanguage links would be hidden anyway, as well as any wikidata links, for all common uses and purposes). Probably a job for a bot, but I am not familiar enough with the topic to initiate this. 

Help appreciated! [[user:grin|grin]] [[user talk:grin|✎]] 10:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
: I don't think there is a solution. It's often difficult to match site links with articles on different language wikipedias because they follow different taxonomies (e.g. some more inclusive than others). In this case we have the added complications that Acari is probably not monophyletic and is not used in current taxonomies and that mites, the English language word, is exclusive of ticks, which are embedded in the parasitic mite taxon. Each wikipedia will decide how it wants to treat the subject and that will determine the appropriate site links. Getting the sitelinks matching would require all wikipedias to treat the subject the same way. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 14:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:: However, I do think the Wikidata sitelinks are correct for the English Wikipedia: {{wdq|Q2441993}} to [[mite]], {{wdq|Q19137}} to [[Acari]] (a redirect to mite), {{wdq|Q1341457}} to [[Acariformes]], and {{wdq|Q132756}}  to [[Parasitiformes]]. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 14:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
:: As {{U|Jts1882}} says, there isn't a solution given the way that Wikidata works (see my essay [[User:Peter coxhead/Wikidata issues]]). It's only possible to get sitelinks to match completely if all language wikis treat the topics in the same way, which they don't – and indeed shouldn't in cases where concepts differ among languages. It's probably least bad as it is, since, as Jts1882 noted, it's correct for our articles. [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 07:57, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

== Switching language Mite vs Acari ==

I Tried to change the language to (for example) swedish but it does not exist and I thought it was weird. I searched on swedish for "kvalster" which is the equivilent for "Mites" and then went to the english version. I got sent to "Acari" and then immediately redirected to "Mites" however if you look at the page "Acari" there are SEVERAL different language options but on this page (Mites) there are just a few. This is very problematic if you are not a native english speaker and want to know what mite is in your language. Mite and Acari should be merged if possible or the english link should be changed to "the Mite page" In EVERY language connected to "Acari". You only solved the problem in one direction. The languages need to be connected both ways. [[User:Baxstab|Baxstab]] ([[User talk:Baxstab|talk]]) 23:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

:This is a problem to fix on Wikidata, not here. [[User:Hemiauchenia|Hemiauchenia]] ([[User talk:Hemiauchenia|talk]]) 00:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
: The Mite and Acari articles are merged at [[Mite]], with [[Acari]] as a redirect. The site links at Wikidata for English wikipedia correctly reflect this. The site links for other Wikipedias need to be set at Wikidata. Unfortunately, due the nature of the subject matter, not all wikipedias treat the subject the same way (see previous section) and the one-to-one sitelinks used by Wikimedia are inadequate. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 08:14, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
:: It seems there is a way of adding the extra language site link using {{tlx|Interwiki extra|qid=Q19137}}, which adds interlanguage links for Acari as well as mite. This was the method for adding sitelinks before they were centralised on Wikidata. I've added it to the mite article and now the sitelinks section lists 96 language wikipedias, including Swedish. However, the method is deprecated, so it's quite possible a bot will revert my edit. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 09:45, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
:: {{ping|Peter coxhead}} Do you know if this is allowed? It seems a solution for such articles and the problem keeps getting raised on talk pages. When we add a sitelink for a redirect on wikidata, we should add the {{tlx|Interwiki extra}} template to the target article. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 09:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Jts1882}} I had no idea of the existence of this template. I see that it adds the extra language wiki only if it would not already be there, so doesn't deal with the case of two articles on one wiki (e.g. monotypic genus and only species) corresponding to one on another wiki, but it does seem useful to me. Where is it deprecated? [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 10:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
:::: {{ping|Peter coxhead}} I should have said that adding the sitelinks manually has been superseded, with setting them at Wikidata being the preferred method. I didn't see something specifically referring to the template being deprecated.
:::: In your example, the monotypic genus could use the template to sitelink to the species item and the only species article link it to the genus item (although a merge would be appropriate), whereas on the other wikipedia the combined article would link to the other item (i.e. to the species item if at the genus or vice versa). It's messy and only works when someone sets it up. A better way around cases where there isn't a one-to-one correspondences would be much better. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 11:34, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
:::::{{tq|although a merge would be appropriate}} – it seems to be the policy of some other language wikipedias (e.g. the French wikipedia) to have articles at each rank for monotypic taxa, so we're stuck with their multiple articles.
:::::I couldn't agree more that it's messy, but the editors at Wikidata have always been adamant about maintaining strict 1:1 links, so we seem to be stuck with various ad hoc solutions. [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 11:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)