Talk:Strigiphilus garylarsoni
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Untitled
editIt seems there is an inconsistency here...the article describes the organism as a "member of the Mallophaga order," whereas the taxobox lists the order as "Phthiraptera." Can someone resolve this problem? G-my 04:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- In the article on Mallophaga, it is quite clear that it is a suborder (chewing lice) of the Phthiraptera (lice) order. I'll make the change. Fishal 01:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
So... many... Links
editThis is quite possibly the densest article (link to non-link) on the entire Wikipedia. Does "come" really need a link? It makes it look as though it's been pulled from Uncyclopedia...
There are way too many links, yeah. I'll remove some of the most unnecessary ones. G-my 10:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Mis-quoted source?
editThe article identifies the 'swan' quote as originating from the Pre-History book, page 171. I am certain, being almost perfectly familiar with the book in question, that this quote does NOT originate from that page, which is a picture of the louse (the scientist's letter is opposite) or from any page. It may be from one of Larson's other books (I don't have any of them, just the basic cartoon collections), but somebody ought to check up on this. 72.131.11.47 20:50, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The quotation does appear in some early copies of the book next to the letter, but for some reason, has been omitted in later printings. (Later printings are also missing a credit for the designers of the nerd sculpture which appears on the book's front and back covers.) Mobo85 20:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Inconsistency w.r.t. type host / location
editThe original species description writes of the holotype: "Holotype ♂, ex. O. leucotis granti, N. Rhodesia, N'dola, 20-III-1955, ML/131, British Museum (Natural History)".
But what's labeled as the holotype in the Natural History Museum, London reads: "Bubo c. coromandus, Bharatpur, Rajputana. 4.I.1952. 19687."
These are different species of owl and different locations; I'm deferring to the species description but ideally this discrepancy would be resolved or at least explained.