Talk:Noronhomys

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Vespucci's Rodent → Noronhomys — In the relevant literature on this animal, it is usually referred to as just Noronhomys; the proposed common name "Vespucci's Rodent" is used in a single scholarly work (though a very important one), on Wikipedia, and some Internet reference sites that probably got their information from Wikipedia. In contrast, scholarly articles on the topic (of which there are not many) universally refer to it by the scientific name, as does the IUCN Red List. See WT:MAMMAL#Common names for a lengthy discussion on this topic. Ucucha 21:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Although the trivial name is rather beautiful... :) Tevildo (talk) 22:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

• Support per nom. --Una Smith (talk) 06:19, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• Support per nom as well. Vespucci's Rodent is not more beautiful than common, if you ask me. Noronhomys… innotata (Talk | Contribs) 23:45, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Two Tails?

Vespucci mentioned that the rats he saw had "two tails". What's the deal with this? Were they inbred? Stonemason89 (talk) 14:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That's an interesting topic that Carleton and Olson give a good explanation for. I'll write an article on the species of lizard concerned shortly. Ucucha 14:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, that was more complex than I thought. The poor lizard has been embroiled in a quite unprecedented amount of taxonomic chaos. But Trachylepis atlantica is in Wikipedia now. Ucucha 19:42, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for writing the article about Trachylepis, it really cleared a lot of things up for me! I believe I misunderstood Vespucci's quote at first; it's one of those grammatically ambiguous phrases that could be parsed either as "rats and lizards / with two tails" (my first guess) or "rats / and lizards with two tails" (which is likely what he actually meant to say, but this interpretation didn't occur to me at first). I initially thought he was saying both the rats AND the lizards had two tails, but now it looks like he was probably referring only to the lizards. It looks like my question is answered; thanks for your help! Stonemason89 (talk) 02:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Size

There's a problem with the size template being used; a sentence in the Description section currently reads "In three individuals measured, the occipitonasal length, a measure of skull length, varies from 38 to 39.2 millimetres (1.5 to 1.5 in)". That's one of the problems of using those templates. Firsfron of Ronchester 02:19, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note; I fixed the problem. Ucucha 15:52, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 14 March 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No consensus. I was tempted to instead vote oppose on policy/guideline grounds as set out below, but I think it's a valid no-consensus close as is, so let's move on. Andrewa (talk) 16:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

---

Noronhomys → Noronhomys vespuccii – Theres only one species in Noronhomys and its officially called Noronhomys vespuccii A8v (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

@A8v: according to the Manual of Style naming convention for monotypic fauna, "A monotypic taxon is a taxonomic group which only contains a single subgroup (e.g., a genus with only one known species, even a subphylum with one family with one genus). In such a case...the article (if there is no common name) should go under the scientific name of lowest rank, but no lower than the monotypic genus." (emphasis mine)

In other words, the naming conventions for genii with one species is "if there's no conventional name, put the article at the genus level". Indeed, one of the examples surfaced in the guideline linked above is Amphionides, a genus containing a single species, which is titled at the genus level. Noronhomys has one species, Noronhomys vespuccii, and is saved at "Norohomys" as a result - because that's exactly what the naming conventions require us to do. Ironholds (talk) 18:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Noronhomys. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140627094911/http://www.iucnredlist.org/ to http://www.iucnredlist.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:10, 19 May 2017 (UTC)