Jump to content

Talk:Little brown bat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

A new article pygmy sand bat has been created, which while not wikified etc.. yet looks like a duplicate of this article but has more content. External link - [little brown bat] - seems to show that Little brown bat is the correctly named starting point Peripitus 00:14, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brown bats can be extremely aggressive and will make no hesitations to bite, and bite hard. Many times these bats are attributed to spreading rabies due to their aggressive nature to bite as a first line defense.(AJK)

Original Research

[edit]

I have added this flag in response to an invalid citation by Frederick_athey for content added by the same. I am not sure what the intent of the malformed citation is, but it appears to be someone citing himself. This is a violation of WP:NOR. I will leave the content in the article for now because I have no reason to doubt it, but I will remove the invalid reference. Please add a reference to a published work containing this information. Autumn Wind (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see the OR tag was removed claiming "no reason given." Perhaps I didn't thoroughly explain, but if you look at the 00:15, 6 February 2013 version http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Little_brown_bat&oldid=536819471 It should be obvious that the user attempted to cite himself for the content. Autumn Wind (talk) 17:28, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I let this sit a while but it's time to clean it up. I will remove the uncited statements.Autumn Wind (talk) 15:10, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Change of heart. I have no reason to doubt that last statement in the section, and certainly not every statement on wikipedia has to be proven beyond a doubt. therefore I will just leve the citation needed tag. I think thats a fair compromise.Autumn Wind (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Endangered

[edit]

Little Brown Bats are, in fact, on the U.S endangered species list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.143.42 (talk) 03:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IUCN Red List

[edit]

The infobox edits by User:108.41.6.238, changing the status of Myotis lucifugus from "LC" (Least Concern) to "EN" (Endangered) is not supported by the current IUCN Red List category, updated most recently in 2008. Nor does "Brown Bat" or "Little Brown Bat" appear on the current Endangered Species List of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Accordingly, I reverted these edits. -- Cuppysfriend (talk) 23:06, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smithsonian article

[edit]

Point taken above, but this article from the reputable Smithsonian mag suggests that there is serious concern for this species. Can someone of a more biological persuasion sort this out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schnitzi (talk • contribs) 11:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Little brown bat. 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:

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) 00:14, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

restructuring biology

[edit]

@Pagliaccious: what would you think about restructuring the biology section? I think "diet and foraging" would absorb the diet subsection as well as echolocation. The "roosting" section can be absorbed in other areas too--in range and habitat, we can talk about roosting and foraging habitat. Basically I think that the existing sections are not intuitive and could be combined into something that resembles what's on Pteropus. I like the parasite section, though! If you want to expand beyond parasites we could talk more about rabies/white nose in terms of pathophysiology instead of how they're described in later sections. Just some ideas bouncing around my brain. Enwebb (talk) 22:55, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Enwebb: I agree with everything. Roosting makes much more sense in the habitat section and echolocation makes more sense in a foraging section, but I'm unsure of what a section including parasites, infections, and diseases would be called. There's probably a simple term but I can't think of it off the top of my head... Anyways, on the topic of moving sections, I'm not very fond of subsections with just a few lines, so I would like to either combine the shorter sections or expand them if either is possible. Other than that, I plan to work on expanding the roost section and moving it to "Distribution and habitat" tomorrow. Best regards, Pagliaccious (talk) 23:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hm maybe "Predation and disease"? Then we could add in other predators, parasites, and disease. Or we could retitle "conservation" with "mortality and conservation" and have those factors there. Enwebb (talk) 00:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think "Predation and disease" would be perfect. Conservation is human motivated so I don't think it would mesh well with parasites/predation. Great idea! Pagliaccious (talk) 00:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Little brown bat/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 21:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by Dunkleosteus77

[edit]
appreciate it!
changed to article titles
gotcha
I would argue those are distinct terms. Hibernacula refers to a place while colony refers to the organisms themselves.
Well you are referring to population loss, not habitat loss   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  14:34, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased
I was referring to the lead   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[1]
Okay but hibernacula is unnecessarily complex. If an average high school graduate (or college graduate for that) doesn’t know a word, and that word isn’t really *needed* for the article, then you shouldn’t use it   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:40, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is a hibernating bat species. No, "hibernacula/um" isn't "needed" in this article (I could talk around it, as you can with any term), but it is what the term is called. I'm not making the article unnecessarily complex, and this isn't the Simple English WP. My impression now is that based on the context clues of the sentence, as well as the obvious cognate of the word to "hibernate", the reader can understand the meaning. However, I can add an in-text explanation after the word so that its meaning is explicit, as I have with "uropatagium", "tragus" and others. Enwebb (talk) 05:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I didn’t make the connection with hibernation at all, if you really want that word in there you need an explainer   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:08, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • One drive-by comment, considering how many photos of this species we have on Commons, there are some aspects that I think should be illustrated. For example, we have these photos of large colonies[2][3], and I also think we should show how the wings look outstretched, like in one of these images:[4][5] FunkMonk (talk) 00:25, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
added quite a few more images
Looks good! I just noticed that the colony image description says "(mixed Indiana bat and little brown bat cluster)", which should probably be noted in the caption. Perhaps the head shot could benefit form a closer crop too. FunkMonk (talk) 03:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
cropped & lightened up Enwebb (talk) 04:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
done
done
Edited a bit. My intention was for the first paragraph to focus on dentition and the 2nd on other aspects of skull morphology
added in-text explanation
swapped sentence order
added in-text explanation
not proven, but I added that it's been speculated and there are conflicting studies
removed
year 2, added
added the ref to the caption
No I meant to the source line of the image at the Commons   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  14:41, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
done
okay

Dunkleosteus77 anything else?

You should say where in the body the parasites are found (like say gastric helminth parasites)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:09, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
done
Not sure what you mean here. In context, that content is "Survivors of white-nose syndrome have longer bouts of torpor than individuals that die. Also, during torpor, their body temperature is colder." meaning that survivors of WNS are in torpor at lower body temperatures that individuals that die.
you spend the previous paragraph talking about torpor and then in the middle of this paragraph you explain what torpor is   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not explaining what torpor is; I'm explaining why some bats survive white-nose syndrome. I can talk more about torpor in the previous paragraph. Enwebb (talk) 03:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What about something like ...have longer bouts of torpor and lower bodies temperatures during torpor than individuals that die. (assuming I'm reading that pair of sentences correctly)? Guettarda (talk) 03:50, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Guettarda thank you for the suggestion--sentences merged together. I also added a physiology section. Enwebb (talk) 04:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've read through the predation and disease section several times now but I'm not sure which content you're referring to. Can you be more specific? Enwebb (talk) 04:31, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Things like “In some colonies where grouping behavior was common before exposure to white-nose syndrome, bats now hibernate in a more solitary fashion” which should be in the Range section but aren’t   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, I disagree. I don't consider social behavior under the purview of range and habitat. Enwebb (talk) 03:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
the Range section seems to imply the bats always congregate in colonies   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the range section implies that. Regardless, I added a social behavior section to elucidate social behaviors in this species. I also added more-specific information to the predation and disease section regarding the impact that white-nose has on social roosting behaviors. Enwebb (talk) 04:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

well phrases like “the largest known aggregations of this species,” and, “maternity colonies,” and even the word “roost” (though not the technical definition, but connotation is more important than denotation because a reader will always assume it’s the former) imply more than one, and though you never explicitly say it, I would have thought these bats always roost in colonies if I only read the Range or Roosting habitat section (which is where I would look for such information since I’m looking for the word “roost” and the average reader does not read articles to their entirety top to bottom in order). Alternatively you could change “Social behavior” to “Social and roosting behavior” or simply “Roosting behavior”   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:56, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is not my issue if you (or the reader) inserts nonexistent words into the article. We have been doing a lot of quibbling lately, but here are two options: you decide that the article meets the good article criteria, which are, after all what is is being judged against. Pass the article. You decide that the article does not meet the standards. Fail the article. Social behavior is not habitat selection. If the reader wants to know about roosting habitat, they can find it in the roosting habitat section. If they want to know about social behavior, they can find it in the social behavior section. I've been pretty accommodating to this knit-picking so far, but I am uninterested in continuing. Have we had a falling out or something? Because it seems that you are reviewing this as if I've wronged you. Enwebb (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Woah I’m just trying to make sure it’s good and ready to go as well as it can possibly be, and sure this isn’t FA but if I see a point where the article can be better it should be taken   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  23:37, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that the change you are proposing would improve the article. I don't understand why the creation of a social behavior section is not enough to address your concerns. Enwebb (talk) 04:26, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This isn’t a point to fail, but I implore you to reconsider because people will go to the section with “roost” in the title to learn about roosting. Most people will not see the social behavior section for roosting information because they are looking for the word “roost” so you could just change social behavior to roosting behavior because that’s all that’s in that section   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  19:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Little_brown_bat&oldid=1202494177"