Talk:Western cottonmouth

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agkistrodon piscivorus leucostoma. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060928121403/http://www.stlzoo.org/animals/abouttheanimals/reptiles/snakes/westerncottonmouth.htm to http://www.stlzoo.org/animals/abouttheanimals/reptiles/snakes/westerncottonmouth.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 15:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 17 July 2021

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 Consensus is to use the common name. (non-admin closure) В²C ☎ 06:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

---

Agkistrodon piscivorus leucostoma → Western cottonmouth – WP:COMMONNAME (already redirects here, is well accepted as the common name, and is unambiguous). See also the ongoing RMs at Talk:Agkistrodon piscivorus conanti and Talk:Agkistrodon piscivorus. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 04:37, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

• Support: Per nom. YorkshireExpat (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

• Opposed: Changing the name from the Latin to common name does not meet "the five criteria" Wikipedia:Article titles.

Consistency – Of the 16 pages in the Category: Agkistrodon, 14 use are using the Latin names and have been for years, and the two that are not where just changed in the last 20 days. Recent request to change Agkistrodon piscivorus page name to cottonmouth resulted in Not moved and closed on 2 August 2021. see Talk:Agkistrodon piscivorus

Furthermore, this subspecies has not been recognized as valid taxon for many years, and this page is outdated and obsolete, and should probably be deleted. See heading "Subspecies and taxonomic changes" on the Agkistrodon piscivorus page for detail.

WiLaFa (talk) 17:18, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Whether the article should be deleted and whether its content needs changes are different questions. This discussion is about what name the article should have, if we assume the article will continue to exist. Cottonmouth might arguably be ambiguous between at least two species, but I have not seen anyone argue that "Western cottonmouth" is substantially ambiguous. The idea that Latin names should be generally preferred over common names for articles about fauna and flora is not supported by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Note that since this RM was opened, the two RMs described above have been closed, and Agkistrodon piscivorus conanti has been moved to Florida cottonmouth. In my opinion, Agkistrodon piscivorus conanti is a very similar case. (Agkistrodon piscivorus was not moved to "Cottonmouth", as "Cottonmouth" was argued to be an ambiguous name that applies to what are recently considered to be two different species.)—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles has been notified of this discussion. — Shibbolethink ^{(♔ ♕)} 04:37, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

• Support - in fact, the common name is more stable than the scientific name currently as we have authorities treating it as a species or subspecies. Has one common common name. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:24, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

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.

Merge to end confusion

If this snake is no longer considered a subspecies of the Agkistrodon piscivorus, but now recognized as the same, why is this article not merged like the Eastern Cottonmouth? The subspecies box makes it appear that the snake is still a subspecies titled "Western cottonmouth" with the separate Trinomial name of Agkistrodon piscivorus leucostoma.

I can see no valid reasoning why this should not be merged, possibly to a section or subsection of Agkistrodon piscivorus, where some history of the taxonomy can be explained, as well as any valid "external links". One link, titled Western cottonmouth discusses looking for a Louisiana pine snake, which is indigenous to northwestern Louisiana and northeastern Texas, and finding a "Western cottonmouth", which would actually be an Agkistrodon piscivorus. -- Otr500 (talk) 19:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)