Talk:Star-nosed mole

Mechanoreception in star-nosed mole was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 19 December 2013 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Star-nosed mole. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Star-nosed mole article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Mammals C‑class Mid‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 September 2019 and 7 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Missy Janelle (article contribs).

Question

Hey, I was just wondering if there could be some way to change that comment about fingers growing outward on a hand. It's not a big deal, but to the best of my knowledge fingers don't actually grow outwards, but rather are one large block of cells, some of which later undergo apoptosis to create the gaps between the fingers. Again, it's no biggie, but in the interest of accuracy it might be nice to make some change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.6.82 (talk) 04:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about if we just said "seem to"? But, please, go ahead and change it as you see fit. Chrisrus (talk) 15:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very Bad Picture

The animal in the picture is dead and looks horrible. Look at it; that amazing alive pink nose all sadly, gray, limp, and dead. There are much better pictures available in the commons. I would replace it myself but don't know how. Please help. Chrisrus (talk) 06:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no better pictures on the Commons—the only other one is the drawing you just added. I don't see what's so bad about a corpse; we're lucky to have any images. —innotata 18:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also think the illustration on Commons is still in copyright; if so I'll ask for it to be deleted. —innotata 18:38, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's not going to improve the article! Chrisrus (talk) 20:13, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Violating copyright is violating copyright. —innotata 15:21, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. But why now, suddenly? Chrisrus (talk) 15:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? I ask for Commons files that appear to be copyright violations to be deleted whenever I see them. I also look for files to upload for Commons; I did look for such files for this species earlier, but as expected I did not find any. I can't see how you could think I want to get rid of the illustration and replace it with the photograph. I think both are poor, but we are lucky to have the one photograph of a dead mole. —innotata 15:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, that illustration has been in the article for a very long time. It wasn't at the top, though, I just moved it from the middle to the top. Maybe you hadn't seen it. It's a pretty good illustration, designed for such a purpose. Chrisrus (talk) 19:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But a copyright violation is a copyright violation, and like Innotata I can't see how this particular illustration is in the public domain. Are there no plates of Condylura in 19th-century works, like from Audubon or Alston? Ucucha 19:18, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some copies of an Audubon illustration online, but the images are too low-resolution to use. —innotata 13:52, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sternmull.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.130.246 (talk) 18:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I look forward to replacing the sad gray courpse with a better picture of that lively nose. Chrisrus (talk) 21:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sternmull.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Sternmull.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 6 September 2011

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Crap! Chrisrus (talk) 04:24, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a pity; I noticed that the image had no information about its source when you added it. I'll look for some federal government images some time (if you want to get one, try looking around on government websites), and ask for photos, but not now. —innotata 22:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]