Talk:Crotalus concolor

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: move for Yellow rattlesnake, not moved for Sidewinder. Even the Support below is conditional, so no prejudice against subsequent move to different common name. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Crotalus concolor → Yellow rattlesnake
• Yellow rattlesnake → Yellow rattlesnake (disambiguation)
• Crotalus cerastes → Sidewinder
• Sidewinder → Sidewinder (disambiguation)

– Fauna should use their common name for article names Ddum5347 (talk) 00:29, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Uncertain for both of these which is really the primary topic. -Kj cheetham (talk) 08:21, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• I am unsure for Crotalus cerastes. I agree that it is definitely more commonly known as the "sidewinder" than as "Crotalus cerastes". However, I'm not completely sure it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "sidewinder", when considering Bitis peringueyi and Cerastes cerastes and other snakes that move by sidewinding. It seems possible that "sidewinder" tends to just vaguely refer to any snake that moves by sidewinding, and perhaps the term should redirect to the sidewinding article as a concept description article. I am less concerned about other topics (e.g., the missile), since I think the other topics derive their name from the snake(s). I tend toward oppose for Crotalus concolor. It does not seem clear to me that Crotalus concolor is most commonly known as "Yellow rattlesnake" or that it is the primary topic for that term. The English Wikipedia concept of "common name" (i.e. the name most commonly used in independent reliable sources written in English) is not the same thing as the taxonomy concept of "common name" (i.e. any colloquial name that does not follow scientific Latinized binomial nomenclature). It is important not to conflate the two. Per the discussion at Talk:Daboia palaestinae (and elsewhere, I am sure), sometimes the scientific name is the most common name in English reliable sources. Using a scientific name can also avoid ambiguity. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support 1 & 2 if there is consensus that "Yellow rattlesnake" is the most common name, in which case Crotalus concolor can move to Yellow rattlesnake over the current disambiguation page which is not required. If Timber rattlesnake is also known as "Yellow rattlesnake" (and the article doesn't say so) then a hatnote will do. Oppose 3 & 4. The situation is not clear and per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (fauna): "Do not use vernacular names when it is not clear to what the name refers". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved back to Crotalus concolor as the status quo ante and an unambiguous name, per the consensus at the discussion below and outcome of the Move Review. Yellow rattlesnake will be converted to a disambiguation page. No such user (talk) 08:24, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Yellow rattlesnake → Midget faded rattlesnake
• Yellow rattlesnake (disambiguation) → Yellow rattlesnake

– Given the discussion above, comments at the move review, discussion at closers page of the above requested move faded rattlesnake or midget faded rattlesnake should be consider the common name. Both currently like to this page. The following ngram shows that both midget faded rattlesnake is more commonly used that yellow rattlesnake since the 1970s and almost uses of "faded rattlesnake" are subsumed by "midget faded rattlesnake". PaleAqua (talk) 20:24, 20 August 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support move to midget faded rattlesnake as it seems almost all sources and guidebooks use this name. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose The binomial is the more commonly use name for the species, and its better given the recent elevation from subspecies to species. Additionally the other member species articles are all at the binomials, not at vernacular names. --Kevmin § 21:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Please note that the previous RM closure is also undergoing a WP:Move review discussion at the same time, as found here: Wikipedia:Move review/Log/2020 August. —BarrelProof (talk) 02:47, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That bureaucracy takes time, though, which is why I suggested to you to do a RM instead. And there is no prohibition against RMs while a move review is going on. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the ngram given and WP:NCFAUNA. That might leave some members of a genus at the scientific name and some at a common name, and that's OK, per the naming convention. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:23, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, sorry I made a comment in the wrong place on this. I agree with @Kevmin: that this taxon is best known by its binomen, its common names are confusing and convoluted with changing species concepts within the group. I suggest listing this species under its binomen and using any common names with explanations in text. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 00:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, with the additional comment that I would strongly support moving this article back to the title "Crotalus concolor"; in cases where there are multiple "common names", then it is definitely preferrable to stick with the scientific binomial. Dyanega (talk) 17:06, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support move to midget faded rattlesnake - this common name has been almost universally used since at least Klauber (1956) in papers, field guides, etc., and is the common name recommended by the authoritative SSAR North American Standard English & Scientific Names Database (https://ssarherps.org/publications/north-american-checklist/). Species status for concolor is not universally accepted. That said, either C, concolor or midget faded rattlesnake would be much better than Yellow Rattlesnake! Caissaca (talk) 10:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert to Crotalus concolor and disambiguate Yellow rattlesnake: Until the page was moved, we didn't really have a problem that needed solving. I think we all agree that the article about Crotalus concolor definitely shouldn't be at "yellow rattlesnake". Per Kevmin, other articles on similar species are at binomials. Per Faendalimas, the vernacular can be confusing and convoluted. It is not clear that something different from the binomial is an improvement – this doesn't seem to be a very widely known species with a clearly dominant well known unambiguous vernacular name, so let's just revert to the status quo ante. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:57, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Revert to binomial nomenclature. The Crotalus concolor title is the highest and best PRECISE name for this article hands down per the references given above in the previous RM and at MRV. The original title appears to have been Crotalus oreganus concolor and was only changed when the concolor subspecies name was upgraded to species status and editors determined that was the snake's COMMONNAME. That's policy and hasn't changed, so I !vote to revert to the status quo. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 04:41, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.