Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals/Bats Task Force/Archive 1

Scope

Should we include important roosts in the scope of this group? This seems too much for this project, considering the number of participants so far, and the huge amount of articles already targeted (more than 1300 species + evolution, etc). I would suggest that we limit the scope of the project to species of bats in the world (many articles missing and majority of the existent articles are low quality), and maybe later to increase the scope later when first objectives are reached? Fulup56 (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

In the 800+ articles I've tagged so far, a very, very large majority have been species. But I have also tagged two roosts of major significance (Bracken Cave and the Congress Bridge in Austin Texas, which are the largest natural and non-natural bat roosts in the world). Considering that there are going to be 1300 species of bats that need good coverage, including a small number of roosts, major nonprofits in bat conservation (BCI, Organization for Bat Conservation) and notable bat scientists will add such a tiny number of articles to the total that they're really a "drop in the bucket." If we wait until the 1300 species are adequately covered, we will be waiting forever. Enwebb (talk) 14:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I would be more than happy to have the maximum of articles of good quality linked with bat topic. My main point was that the definition of "main roosts" is very large. For example the biggest roost in Europe does have far less specimens that Bracken cave, but its importance for European species is still very important. This is not to say that the articles of the most important roosts in the world should not be improved (they should be!), but it is more to say that this wikiproject is mainly targeting species (including template for articles)and may not be very useful. But at the end, I agree with you, this a drop in the bucket. Fulup56 (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

To Do List

I deleted the following sentence on the to do list : "More important species are listed under the ESA or listed as endangered on the IUCN. Bats that cause conflicts with humans are important." Most of the species in the world are not listed under the ESA. Also, it seems not appropriate to write that species are more important than others, as well as highlighting on this paragraph conflicts bats/humans. These point should not jeopardise the improvement of article, neither the creation of new articles, which are main objectives of this WikiProject. Of course, if for specific species, conflicts are known between human activities and bat populations, they should be underlined and described in the most neutral way possible. Fulup56 (talk) 09:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I agree, most species are not more important than others. But some articles are more important than others. People have more interest in bats that are endangered, vampire bats, and bats that live in their homes and cause them problems. Also, I would argue that endangered species need good articles the most to promote awareness of the danger they're in. I know that the ESA only applies to species in the United States, which is why I included the IUCN, which is considered the world authority on endangered species. When tagging articles, I created a template that allows you to select the quality and the importance of the article, which will help assess high-importance, priority articles and create a plan of action for proceeding with the generally poor quality of bat articles on the english Wiki. This is in no way to comment on the importance of the species! Enwebb (talk) 14:09, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Ok. I agree that CR/EN/VU species should be targeted at first. But again, which red-list are we using? The world-wide Red List might consider a species as LC, but the European Red-List might list the same species at EN...I have seen also your tagging system. Very great work! Well done. There is also an option to include the articles as part of the Mammals Wikiproject, adding in the box that this article is also part of the Bat Task Force. This allow all the participants of the Mammals Wikiproject to monitor the quality of the articles, which require a lot of work as you may have seen.Fulup56 (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

European species

In the frame of the Wikiproject, I am hoping to involve NGOs and local bat groups from Europe to improve the quality of the European species. As most of the people that might be involved in this activity are very new to Wikipedia, I would like to create a specific section with the 50 European species. I hope this will help the people to clearly identify the pages targeted by this specific activity. Of course, the ultimate idea would be to have these new users of Wikipedia to be involved in the management of the Wikiproject, and improve the quality of any others articles within the scope. Any comments?Fulup56 (talk) 10:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

List of fruit bats

I'm not sure if anyone's aware of its existence yet, but I created the article list of fruit bats about a week ago, and it's now at FLC. Feel free to comment. Thanks,   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  22:28, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

October goals

In case anyone is interested, the October goals for the bats task force are "spooky bats"! Articles selected for improvement include Beelzebub's tube-nosed bat, lesser ghost bat, little goblin bat, demonic tube-nosed fruit bat, and Egyptian tomb bat. All are pretty much stub quality, and the goal is to elevate them to "C-class" or higher. Help is welcome! Enwebb (talk) 20:16, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Adding images

Hi, someone hanging around who is willing to take a look at this image to see if I can add it to the infobox of Miller's long-tongued bat? Thank you for your time. :) Lotje (talk) 11:02, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message! I went ahead and added the image to the taxobox. Enwebb (talk) 17:59, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for merging of Template:WikiProject Mammals/Bats Task Force

Template:WikiProject Mammals/Bats Task Force has been nominated for merging with Template:WikiProject Mammals. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Jameboy (talk) 20:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles to improve/create for March

The popular pages bot just ran for the month. For the past few months, I've been picking start/stub class class off the list and made it a goal to improve them to C-class or higher (usually 4 or 5 in a month). Another possible area for the March goals section is this list of critically endangered and endangered bat species that are at stub class. Or we could do something else entirely. And then as far as creating missing articles, I have been looking at the missing articles on the main page and selecting species that are accepted by the COL that have an IUCN evaluation (the IUCN eval because it makes it easier to write an article, but not necessary). Any input as to what species should be in the March goals section? Enwebb (talk) 16:18, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

I think improving four or five of the critically endangered stubs is a good goal. I don't really have any other ideas for articles to create/improve. Pagliaccious (talk) 13:36, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Identify these bats?

The US Fish & Wildlife service has some great Public-domain images on this Flickr album (scroll otwards the bottom) that give close shots of anatomy and humans for scale. (Particularly, [1] [2] and [3]). Can anyone identify the specific species pictured? thanks! MarginalCost (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

MarginalCost The man pictured is Rob Mies and he was formerly with the defunct org. Organization for Bat Conservation. Based on programming that Mies did through that organization, I would guess that the species in image 1 are Pteropus vampyrus on the left (possibly the one they called "Tom") and a big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus) on the right. Image 2 is the same Pteropus vampyrus. Image 3 is a straw-colored fruit bat, Eidolon helvum. These image suggestions are consistent with animals that Mies and Organization for Bat Conservation used for education and outreach programs. Enwebb (talk) 19:29, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@Enwebb: Wow, thanks for such specific information so quickly. I had hoped that the first image would be of the same species (at different developmental stages), but no luck. I had assumed the small bat at right on the first image was a juvenile, but it looks like the "big brown bat" is apparently a "microbat" (ironic), so it's hard for me tell. Does it look like a juvenile to you? If not, it may not add much to the article. I've added #2 to Large flying fox, and #3 to Straw-coloured fruit bat, but you might be able to give a more interesting caption (EDIT: like perhaps whether #3 is a female, as I would guess from the description?). MarginalCost (talk) 19:56, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

MarginalCost bats are actually rather interesting like that! Newborns are very large comparative to their adult size--they are up to 30% of their mother's weight at birth. The big brown bat pictured is fully grown. Microbats like the big brown bat reach adult size within 4-6 weeks after birth, generally. The P. vampyrus pictured is a male but I don't know about the big brown bat or the straw-colored fruit bat. Enwebb (talk) 20:05, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@Enwebb: Thanks! I've now learned several things today. If it's not in a different stage of development I don't think the image adds much over the existing images on Big brown bat, I'll leave it off for now. Thanks again! MarginalCost (talk) 20:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@Enwebb: Is the first and second picture (here: [4]) really Pteropus vampyrus? To me it more resembles Pteropus alecto just because it lacks any sort of orange coloration. Sorry if I'm wrong though! Pagliaccious (talk) 20:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Oh never mind actually. The bat pictured appears as you said to be Tom, a Malayan Flying Fox (P. vampyrus). Here's a link: [5]. Pagliaccious (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Pagliaccious yes Tom threw me at first too! He really doesn't appear to have much of a mantle [6]. It's hard to check because they're shuttered now and their website/facebook are down, but I don't think OBC owned any P. alecto--in fact, I'm not sure if they owned any other Pteropus spp. Enwebb (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Yinpterochiroptera and Yangochiroptera

I've been spending time adding automatic taxoboxes and speciesboxes to various wikipedia wildlife pages. I just got through with rodents and thought I'd tackle bats next. I saw that upper levels of bat taxonomy has recently changed, so I thought I would use that taxonomy to add an automatic taxobox to Yinpterochiroptera and change the megabat taxonomy to a family to reflect tbe recent change. Let me know if something else is more proper....Pvmoutside (talk) 17:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

new and expanded articles

One of the task force members picked up my expansion to Rhinonicteris aurantia, thank you Enwebb, another poorly known bat from the west and north of Australia. Would it be an advantage to the work group if articles I have added or expanded are brought here to your attention? I'm only learning about bats and review of the content would be a comfort, despite my caution, yet the bat articles that fall into my scope needed some love. cygnis insignis 15:11, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: you've done some great work lately! I pop in to look at the hot articles bot about every day, which is how I've seen the bat articles you've been editing. I haven't looked over your edits in great detail but would be happy to take another look. I actually just finished my MS here in the States on a bat research project, so I'm quite enamored with the little guys :) Enwebb (talk) 16:07, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Enwebb, I can see why you would pick that as research project, having dipped my toe into the area recently. Most of my content should be okay, more likely copyedit concerns I can asked to be fixed by those who enjoy it. Can you give me the inside dope on speciation and radiation of microbats, is the thinking going to flip as it did with songbirds, ie more novelty from not to Australasia. cygnis insignis 16:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC) Oh, and congrats on completing the MS! cygnis insignis 16:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

@Cygnis insignis: thanks! I think the geographic and temporal origin of bats is still pretty mysterious at this point! I don't know a whole lot about songbird radiation, but I know the Phyllostomids are an incredibly ecologically diverse family and they're all pretty much in South America. Vespertilionidae has the most species, and they are cosmopolitan. Unsurprisingly, there are more bat species as you approach the tropics. Are you mostly interested in Australian species? Feel free to join the task force--I'm pretty much always down for a GA collab and have been thinking about going for an FA sometime soon. Enwebb (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Enwebb, my self constrained scope is supposed to be the biodiversity hotspot Southwest Australia, my 'country', but I often stray to other areas. Pteropus natalis was deserving, and the outlook is not good, the island lost its other bat in 2009. My local endemic is an interesting one, unknown before 1961. I may be able to access some more arcane facts in physical texts, but not sure what else I can bring to collaboration and the project except enthusiasm. cygnis insignis 17:05, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Vesper bat listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Vesper bat to be moved to Vespertilionidae. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 07:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• Result: moved

Identity of a bat photograph on Commons

"What am I?"

The identity of this bat, ostensibly from Sri Lanka, is disputed. Please see Commons:File:Baby of lesser short-nosed fruit bat (Cynopterus brachyotis).JPG and the discussion on the File talk page. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

replied on the file talk page (definitely not a Cynopterus) Enwebb (talk) 22:25, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Mormopterus eleryi

While working on australian bats, I found the article for the bristle-faced freetail Mormopterus eleryi in an advanced state, some good work by a user who gave it flesh and bones. I've done some copyedits, and Enwebb has given it some attention, the plan is to see that effort promoted. I think it is close to ready for GAN and plan to nominate as a product of this subproject, the bats task group, so am inviting further input before I do that. cygnis insignis 03:01, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

I think you should go for it--it looks pretty good to me! Enwebb (talk) 22:07, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Submitted to [Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests]], on behalf of this task group and its prime mover (an honorary member). I'll note when the GA nom goes ahead. cygnis insignis 07:09, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

• @Enwebb:, any one else, the review is underway at Talk:Setirostris/GA1 (the name was changed Setirostris eleryi). cygnis insignis 11:38, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

• Our article was promoted to GA with review and assistance by Guettarda‎, who quickly noticed the bit I muddled up, does anyone want to give input before I see this nominated for another FA. I haven't done much on bats or mammals before, and I'm pretty vague on important matters like dentition, so even a read through may find other areas for improvement. cygnis insignis 07:10, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Northern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus) listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Northern long-eared bat (Nyctophilus) to be moved to Nyctophilus arnhemensis. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 20:33, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• Result: moved

Lesser long-eared bat listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Lesser long-eared bat to be moved to Nyctophilus geoffroyi. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 15:47, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• Result: moved

Orange leaf-nosed bat listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Orange leaf-nosed bat to be moved to Rhinonicteris. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 08:47, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• Result: not moved

Sac-winged bat listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Sac-winged bat to be moved to Emballonuridae. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 05:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• Result: moved

Dusky flying fox listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Dusky flying fox to be moved to Pteropus brunneus. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 12:45, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Vespertilioidae changes

I've made some taxonomic suggestions to cygnis insignis ( I would have made them myself, but the editor and I sometimes conflict, so I thought that it would be a better way to make changes), namely subfamily Antrozoinae should now be changed to tribe Antrozoini somewhere under the Vespertilioninae as that is how the article is referenced now....Miniopterinae should now be changed to family Miniopteridae.....Vespertilioninae article taxonomy can be changed as well...it looks like the higher and lower taxa for these conflict. Cygnus cites Mammal Species of the World as the reference, and states the higher taxa is correct. Cistugidae also seems to follow this way. I thought somewhere along the line MSW was out of date. Any experts on bats out there who can determine if MSW is out of date for these groups? Which should Wikipedia follow, the higher or lower taxa?.....Pvmoutside (talk) 16:24, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Sigh. I am really bummed about the drama on bat pages the past month. This used to be a very quiet part of Wikipedia and I miss that. MSW3 is very much out of date for these groups (a lot has happened since 2005). The ASM Mammal Diversity Database is summarizing taxonomic changes since MSW3, searchable here or in published form here.

1. Cistugidae is recognized as a family now. That stems from this publication "We conclude that Cistugo should constitute a distinct family within Vespertilionoidea." This change was repeated by the Mammal Diversity Database
2. As for Antrozoinae, "Vespertilionidae is the largest family in bats compris-ing about 400 species. The family has been traditionally divided into several subfamilies, according to morpho-logical characters: Miniopterinae, Antrozoinae, Keri-voulinae, Murininae, Myotinae, and Vespertilioninae [Simmons, 2005]. Miniopterinae has meanwhile been el-evated to a fa m i ly stat us [M i l ler-But ter wor t h et a l., 20 07]. Concerning Antrozoinae, most molecular investigations nested this subfamily as a tribe within Vespertilioninae [Hoofer and Van Den Bussche, 2003; Roehrs et al., 2010]. Thus, according to recent phylogenetic reconstructions, only 4 subfamilies belong to Vespertilionidae" [7]
3. Mammal Diversity Database also recognizes Miniopteridae as a family, as is repeated in the above publication.

there's a lot of taxonomic updating that needs to happen on the bat pages, unfortunately. Enwebb (talk) 16:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Traditionally, this is done with citations and explanations. I am especially persnickety on this point, because … policy. cygnis insignis 16:52, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

"states the higher taxa is correct" said nothing of the sort. cygnis insignis 16:54, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

cygnis, you are correct you didn't actually say that, but you implied it by saying on your talk page "The family article is currently using a reference to MSW, it is preferable to amend the information to accomodate other arrangement.".....so, I'll move forward with Enwebb's suggestions unless anyone objects further... Pvmoutside (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

I have objected on your talk page, before you made this cross-posting across five different talk pages. cygnis insignis 17:45, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

so Cygnis, you're also objecting then to Enwebb and his references?....what should we do Enwebb?...…Pvmoutside (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Her*. I've been updating the page with these references. Enwebb (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2019 (UTC)