@arman_ Please explain why you deleted the English common names for this species?

I do see that argument, however there is a problematic side to this in that the name, "Black Cocktail Ant", is used extensively where the species occurs; here in South Africa (at least the Western Cape)...

I believe the situation is being over simplified by comparing it to other more agreeable examples such as a common name "black ant" describing another very high-level taxon (including potentially thousands of species). Personally I've never witnessed the issue of someone misinterpreting the common name Black Cocktail Ant in this way, but then again @peterslingsby ID's our ants for us so he will know. Although I suppose how will we know if the incorrect ID stemmed from this and not just the person incorrectly identifying it as Crematogaster peringueyi (Black Cocktail Ant) for an unrelated reason.

In Afrikaans the common name is "Swartwipgatmier" (which is still up); is this acceptable even though it means exactly the same thing? I'll admit it's not as sound a point, since most Americans don't speak Afrikaans and so they won't be making the same mistake as though it were in English.

I think deleting the name causes more harm than good. Yes, an American might mistakenly type "black cocktail ant" because of how it looks; selecting the South African species. But how many South Africans will not be able to ID their observations because they can't find the select ID for the Black Cocktail Ant (Crematogaster peringueyi) that they saw? Since that is what we call them...

As in the Afrikaans name, I believe an exception should be made in some cases when it isn't as black & white, like here.

I understand that "Black Cocktail Ant" effectively describes all Cocktail Ants, but - to an extent - this is certainly something that we have to accept when it comes to common names. Unlike scientific names, common names become the names for a species when we call them that - not matter how obscure or seeming detached from reality they may seem. Perhaps I'm missing the ballpark though; @tonyrebelo wat dink jy?

Name reinstated. The arrogance of deciding that a name in use in another country is inappropriate totally astounds me.

I'd hate to start a personal argument, but Slingsby is known by most now-active ant identifiers (he seems to have left the site, at least for now) to be a very overzealous identifier, often putting incorrect species, and agreeing to thousands of CV suggested IDs on observations without actually looking at the ants (we've already correct hundreds if not thousands of his misIDs that he never withdraws from, and when he was active he had a habit of deleting IDs to hide his blind agreements, especially on observations where it was obvious he didn't even look at the photo -- e.g. photos of mites or other insects being put to a species level ant ID). I wouldn't exactly rely on him as a source, personally, but this shouldn't really be a part of the discussion as we're talking about vernacular.

Additionally, there appears to be a number of dark-colored arboreal carton-forming Crematogaster species in South Africa; I am very dubious of the ~1000 observations all actually being peringueyi. It's very possible that through overzealous IDs and CV suggestions, there has been an overrepresentation of the species; I don't focus on African ants, so I choose not to disagree with the observations, but I would like to look into it at some point.

A similar thing occurs with Lasius niger & Myrmica rubra in Europe. Both species are extremely over-representative of their corresponding genera, as the common names "Black Garden Ant" & "European Fire Ant" have been glorified in popular media with association to those scientific names. In reality, most normal photos of their genera can be taken to subgenus/species-group at most, with no reason to assume a species-level ID. What I'm trying to say by this is that even though you may attribute the common name "Black Cocktail Ant" to C. peringueyi, people likely are calling numerous Crematogaster species "Black Cocktail Ants" without even realizing it -- they aren't saying "Black Cocktail Ant" in reference to a specific species, it's quite literally in reference to a black cocktail ant.

It shouldn't be hard for people to find the species and genus when identifying observations without the common name, the CV still suggests them, and they can view existing observations to find the scientific name. Most bugs do not have a common name, and I don't see why ants like these should be an exception. I think it should be understood that this is a very diverse group of animals that cannot always be easily taken to species level, and IDs should be left at higher taxon levels in most cases.

I think my argument is also summed up pretty well by this part of the iNat Curator Guide:

Good and Bad Common Names
Names, in general, should be as specific as possible, and common names are no exception. Most of us would agree that "mammal" would not be a good common name for the species Homo sapiens, so please don't add names like "snail" for some obscure gastropod with no real common name just because you think it will make it easier for novices to find. If anything, it will make it harder to find, since there are thousands and thousands of "snails." Instead, try to add names at the taxonomic level where they describe all members of that taxon and only members of that taxon. If a species has no common name in usage, please don't make one up.

/\/\/\

@tonyrebelo

Black Cocktail Ant and Red Harvester Ant are perfectly acceptable, most especially in areas with fewer ants, where such a description may well be more appropriate to some degree.

The problem is this is not true within the areas where the names are being used. There are dozens of black Crematogaster in South Africa, and dozens of red Pogonomyrmex in North America. If this wasn't the case, yes I'd agree.

We found a source here, so I think that concludes that we do have evidence of the usage of the name. My point still stands that the name causes harm, even if it's beneficial as well, but with the guidelines it should get to stay. Feel free to list more sources if you'd like and then I think it's safe to resolve this flag. Anyone interested in the conversation I had that's on the unofficial Discord can see it here.

You make a good point about the misidentifications; absolutely many
are currently incorrect.

I get a long list of sources from a Google search for the name Black Cocktail Ant, although before now it's always just been word of mouth for me. And these could very well have been taken from iNat. For sure some of them will be incorrect and unofficial, so thanks for yours.

http://antsofthecape.blogspot.com/p/myrmicinae-coctail-ants.html

Thanks!