Jump to content

Talk:Creatonotos gangis

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



[edit]

Explains the high interest lately — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.107.182 (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image with hair-pencil

[edit]

This is one of the most viewed Lepidoptera articles. We really should have an image here with the hair-pencil/coremata exposed. A Google Images search for "Creatonotos gangis" shows plenty, but none seem to be appropriately licensed. I don't know much about images. Anybody got any ideas?  SchreiberBike | ⌨  16:25, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found one. I'll see about adding it. --WrenFalcon (talk) 21:20, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added! --WrenFalcon (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious common name "Australian horror moth"

[edit]

An edit added the common names "Baphomet moth" and "Australian horror moth", with a reference to iNaturalist for "Baphomet moth", but no reference for "Australian horror moth". I initially added a "Citation needed" template to "Australian horror moth", but I was unable to find any reliable sources (or any sources before the aforementioned edit was made) referring to this moth as the "Australian horror moth". Therefore, I have decided to remove the common name "Australian horror moth".

It seems as though someone added "Australian horror moth" and various other sources (though no reliable, scholarly publications that I could find) then took this Wikipedia page as an indication that "Australian horror moth" was a widely accepted common name. I believe that keeping "Australian horror moth" in as a common name will lead to the continued propagation of the name, which seems to have originated on Wikipedia - and Wikipedia is a place to document common names (as an encyclopedia), not to suggest new ones. However, if someone chooses to document in the article that the name "Australian horror moth" has been used by some, with appropriate wording, that would be acceptable, in my opinion. At this point, I don't believe the name "Australian horror moth" has been used enough to be considered a "widely accepted common name". (I'm also not sure about "Baphomet moth", but that at least has a source and doesn't falsely insinuate that the moth is primarily located in Australia.) --WrenFalcon (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creatonotos interrupta

[edit]

Hi @UtherSRG, my reasoning for adding Creatonotos interrupta to the See also was because it is often listed as a synonym of Creatonotos gangis (see the page for C. interrupta) - in fact, the description quoted on this page from The Fauna of British India is for the entry Creatonotos interruptus. That said, it's probably best to add a qualifier in the text saying that this may be a synonym for C. interrupta. --WrenFalcon (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]