Talk:Species first discovered in Hong Kong

Hong Kong Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hong Kong To-do:

Attention needed (60)

...needing expert attention (4) • ...without infoboxes (22)

Collaboration needed

Recommend topic

Improvement needed

GA-Class articles (60) • B-Class articles (289)

Cleanup needed

C-Class articles (1,039)

Image needed (348)

Destub needed

Start-Class articles (5,446) • Stub-Class articles (6,731)

Deorphan needed

...orphans

Page creation needed

Requested articles

Miscellaneous tasks

...maintain popularity • ...assess the un-Class (389) • ...assess the un-Importance (1,340)

Tree of Life Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Native

The list is somewhat problematic...what does one mean by "native"?--K.C. Tang 12:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i've revised the list, hope it's now less misleading...--K.C. Tang 00:07, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that then begs the question as to the page title, which is now misleading, as native would mean a full list of species found in HK except those introduced under deliberate or accidental human influence. So should this page be renamed for HK endemic species? HKmoths 14:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have some questions:

do we really need a list concerning HK species? is it significant?
if we do need to have one, what should the list be about? "native species"? then the list is to be veeeeeery long, and bound to be incomplete. "endemic species"? about 10-15 species can be listed, i guess, but one may assume that many of them will sooner or later turn out themselves in Guangdong Province, thus the list become inaccurate...--K.C. Tang 06:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i suggest the list be renamed "Species first discovered in Hong Kong", which, by definition, will include the endemic species.--K.C. Tang 00:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to Q.1 above - "is it significant" - in short I would argue the case that HK is significant geographically and biologically. In relation to the size of China, HK has a much higher density of species. There is also the undeniable fact that most of the biologically rich and diverse habitat in southern China (recognised as part of a global bio-hotspot) is fast disappearing in the name of "progress". So much so that what remains in HK becomes not just regionally significant, but of global significance. In the light of this habitat destruction, the significance of the invertebrate species becomes very high, as most of what "could be assumed" to occur just across the border in Shenzhen and other parts of southern Guangdong Province, may no longer exist and the assumption proven false, resulting in HK's endemics being real endemics and of global biological significance.

Then arises the question - so what? HKmoths 02:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]