Talk:Tiliqua rugosa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 Tiliqua rugosa is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota.
Assessment comments
Amphibians and Reptiles Portal
Tiliqua rugosa is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use amphibians and reptiles resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was no consensus to support any move in particular - default to no move. JPG-GR (talk) 22:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I always called this critter a Shingleback lizard, as did most australian books I have read. Shingleback lizard gets 3410 ghits, Shinglback skink gets 2510 ghits and stump-tailed skink gets 897. Given it is a skink and a propensity these days for more exact descriptive names, I'd say Shingeback Skink is the most appropriate name. How do others feel?

6,810 for "Bobtail lizard", and the accepted name gets 50 more ghits than that. cygnis insignis 23:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Support move

  1. .Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. .--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 21:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oppose move

[edit] moved

  1. I moved it to the species name, and recast the start to clarify the multiple variations on the regional common names. This establishes the most accepted, and always cited, nomenclature; the unique name. There is a number of altered redirects in my contributions, this supports my proposition (IMO). If this move is reversed, please take care not to remove my slight expansion (with citations) to the article. cygnis insignis 01:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I have reverted the move. With discussion less than 24 hours underway and your intended destination different from the requested one, this is not an uncontroversial move and the appropriate new destination (if any) will need to be decided after discussion and consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 05:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
By was of demonstration, I believed I could shortcut the discussion. I would not object if there was a reason for thinking it was not an improvement. As the editor above demonstrated, it would be reversible if a better solution was provided. Is there one? cygnis insignis 06:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not Australian, but I've always heard Stump-tailed skink here in the states. I wouldn't oppose a move, but I think a move towards the scientific name would be best. bibliomaniac15 04:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Following this discussion on the WP:AAR talk page, I'm surprised and disappointed that cygnis insignis' move to Tiliqua rugosa was reverted. --Jwinius (talk) 11:40, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

As you stated later (here), User:cygnis insignis made no reference to a discussion at WP:AAR nor any naming conventions for making the change. When there's a proposal to move A to B and a user comes along, mid-discussion, and moves A to C with no cited reasons, I get suspicious. For the record, I have no opinion on the current nor future location of this article. Let the consensus of those "in the know" determine that. JPG-GR (talk) 02:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.