Stats: where are the 9 invalid species?

[klausriede]

https://orthoptera.speciesfile.org/otus/928913/overview

[typophyllum]

The link produces a 404 error because OTU 938913 no longer exists.

These are the stats of Porthetis carinata (original OTU 824516), which has only four synonyms. https://orthoptera.speciesfile.org/otus/824516/overview

Apparently it counts all combinations (3 with carinanta, 2 with consobrina, 1 with dentatum, 1 with rugosus, 3 with serripes = 10, minus the valid = 9). This doesn't make much sense.

Reported a month ago: https://github.com/SpeciesFileGroup/taxonpages/issues/201

[MMCigliano]

I agree with you, Klaus, in the interpretation of the stats is confussing. However, I think that we really need the stats table. The problem with the stats table is that the Combinations are being included under invalid names. So technically they are synonyms in some broad sense, but not the protonym sense, only these should be listed under invalid names.

[klausriede]

Agree, in fact I wonder if it might be better to list the combinations: for many species vast amounts of non-taxonomic literature exist with combinatorial names . Would be good to see those immediately in a list

[MMCigliano]

The list of combinantions names with the citations are displayed in the Nomenclature pannel.

[klausriede]

yes I see but with many repetitions. Would be good to have a consolidated list at the right side, just like synonyms