This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
I see the use of sentence case is a stylistic issue, which can be determined locally (WP:ARTH), and is not affected by external choices. The Minnesota government is not consistent in its usage, and also uses sentence case on at least one web page, where proper nouns are correctly capitalised (i.e. they haven't simply converted everything to lower case unthinkingly). I would also argue that any claims of a "common name" for an organism only described in 1975 and only present along 1 mile of river are probably unfounded. It is not a common organism; it is not commonly encountered; it does not have a real common name, merely a vernacular name applied to it by government agencies (who for some reason find scientific names unpalatable). --Stemonitis (talk) 07:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly the English name of this species is not commonly used. I've changed this to cite the endangered dragonflies list. However, even if a project (as with WP:RODENT) decides it is appropriate that sentence case be used, that is no reason to do so when this has never or infrequently been done before—hence the infrequent vernacular name is given in Oligoryzomys griseolus and suchlike. —innotata 22:43, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
