Guidelines for taxa linked in literature?
Are there guidelines on which taxa should be always be linked in Biblio literature files (or which taxa should be excluded)? I've mainly been adding taxa that are newly named and/or prominently discussed in the source (e.g. in systematic accounts with diagnostic descriptions of a previously defined genus, I'll tag the genus as well as species novae). Literature that is more general or synthetic rather than taxonomic is more complicated, and checklists can easily include hundreds of taxa.
Would it also be advised to link other taxa that are discussed in passing or introductory context? Is mere mention of a taxon name in text sufficient to tag it?
Should multiple synonyms of the same taxon be listed (as in taxonomic accounts), or is this redundant? How about newly designated synonyms?
If a taxonomic key or map is given, should all listed taxa be entered?
Should taxa always be listed as they appear in the text, even if this conflicts with or is not present in Myriatrix taxonomy? (e.g. if a source states "Foogenus smithi", but the Myriatrix only has "Foogenus (Boogenus) smithi", should the latter be linked?)
Any other general considerations?
