![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Massasauga Rattlesnake is a less comprehensive article, I'd like to merge it into this article and make it into a redirect. - Dawson 17:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
It is very obvious the author is from Canada. While I have no problem with that, it is not appropriate for an article to constantly start out, "in Onatrio..." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.152.125.152 ( talk) 19:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC).
There is no information here about what these snakes eat, or what may eat them. 11:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC) —Unsigned comment by Bao Pu ( talk)
This article on the Massasauga Rattlesnake states that it is the ONLY venomous snake in Michigan and Ontario however, the Wikipedia article on the Common garter snake (see URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garter_snake) states that "Garters were long thought to be nonvenomous, but recent discoveries have revealed that they do in fact produce a mild neurotoxic venom." The direct quotation mentioned above also includes a cited reference thus one would likely draw the conclusion that the article on Garter Snakes is correct. Although this may be considered a minor error, it is a contradiction in the information provided on the listed species and could affect the integrity of Wikipedia. I therefore suggest that the information in this article ( Massasauga Rattlesnake)be amended to state that the Massasauga Rattlesnake is one of only two known venomous species of snake in Michigan and Ontario. -- Greywolf ( talk) 17:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Are you kidding me?? Describing this species as a grey pit viper which is sometimes referred to as a rattlesnake really freaked me out for a while!! I was cross referencing all kinds of stuff trying to nail it down. It wasn't until I noticed an actual rattle in one of the pictures that I breathed a sigh of relief!
SOO.. How come NONE of you geniuses noticed that the descriptions of the RATTLEsnakes have completely left out any mention of the actual RATTLE??
..and you wonder why people question the validity of Wikipedia. Yeesh!!
I'm not even going to bother logging in to claim this 'rant', but could someone find an expert somewhere to do a rewrite of the descriptions? PLEASE?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.70.17 ( talk) 09:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Snakes are often described as "shy". This is anthropomorphism, we do not know enough about snake mindset to use terms specific to humans in describing them. Snake tactics are hit and withdraw, that is different than shy. I have observed Mass. Rat. in the wild and some of their behaviour is aggressive by normal measures. It is also often pointed out that people only run afoul of Mass. Rat. through their own fault. This undermines snake conservation as people do not want to be faulted for doing normal things that may interfere with snakes. Warnings about unsafe behaviour are one thing, but blaming the "victim" does not advance the cause of snakes.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.44.187 ( talk) 17:49, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I had a reference at one point that indicated that Mass. venom was very powerful and was not only a hemotoxin. This is a detail I was trying to confirm by visiting this site. The Michigan site states it is weak, while other sites state it is potent, but that the snakes often inject little or none (ignoring the fact there are big snakes within the type). The fact that the antivenin is not always available it is an important point, as snakebite survival rates are mostly predicated on availability of treatment. The Mass. in Ontario is present in proximity to humans, like Huntsville area, but also in wilderness areas where 2 hours to treatment is not going to happen, in part due to conditions, and in part due to local hospitals not being supplied with the antivenin, and in part because one can't move around a lot after the bite.
Another important point is the maiming the bites cause which is severe with the Mass. It is nice to survive, but there can be extensive tissue damage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.44.187 ( talk) 17:49, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. BarrelProof made a bunch of similar requests at the end of August. See this version of the RM current discussions. All of BarrelProof's proposed moves of snakes to common name seem to have been performed. There wasn't a ton of participation, but there was enough. The person who made the most detailed response here was User:Fungus Guy. He withdrew his objection to the move, though I note he still prefers Massasauga rattlesnake. EdJohnston ( talk) 15:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Sistrurus catenatus → Massasauga – Per WP:COMMONNAME / WP:NCFAUNA, this well-known rattlesnake has a well-established and unambiguous common name, which is "massasauga". The suggested name is the original name of the article, which was moved in 2006 by someone who said "Scientific names should be used whenever possible to avoid confusion". That move seems contrary to the Wikipedia policy/guideline preference for the use of common names, so I suggest to revert it. A web search confirms that "massasauga" is roughly 5.8 times more common on the web than "Sistrurus catenatus" (and probably more that that if we restrict the scope to English-language sources). — BarrelProof ( talk) 05:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 ( talk) 01:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC)--Relisted. Tiggerjay ( talk) 20:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC),
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Massasauga. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Massasauga. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The distribution map is not accurate (for example it does not show the range of this species anywhere in New York, where the article explicitly states it occurs). Where does this map come from? It appears to be "original research", and as such it does not belong on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 ( talk) 15:09, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
This appears to be a more reliable source, and as a government publication can probably be used without a copyright violation: https://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7154.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 ( talk) 15:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus that the taxonomic change described in the nomination has taken hold in sources. ( non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Massasauga → Eastern massasauga – The taxonomy of this species has changed, with the subspecies all becoming species; the title of this page should reflect this. Chumzwumz68 ( talk) 00:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request ( permalink). — BarrelProof ( talk) 17:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. {{ping| ClydeFranklin}} ( t/ c) 23:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. {{ping| ClydeFranklin}} ( t/ c) 00:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you BarrelProof for the move. Now my point of view is that the name of the article should be "eastern massasauga" since there is already a western massasauga page, but it can be argued that simply "massasauga" is the most common name for this species. So I'm open to simply changing it to scientific name. Chumzwumz68 ( talk) 17:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Needs to be changed to ‘threatened’. [3] https://www.fws.gov/species/eastern-massasauga-sistrurus-catenatus 73.8.128.39 ( talk) 18:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Massasauga Rattlesnake is a less comprehensive article, I'd like to merge it into this article and make it into a redirect. - Dawson 17:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
It is very obvious the author is from Canada. While I have no problem with that, it is not appropriate for an article to constantly start out, "in Onatrio..." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.152.125.152 ( talk) 19:22, 19 March 2007 (UTC).
There is no information here about what these snakes eat, or what may eat them. 11:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC) —Unsigned comment by Bao Pu ( talk)
This article on the Massasauga Rattlesnake states that it is the ONLY venomous snake in Michigan and Ontario however, the Wikipedia article on the Common garter snake (see URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garter_snake) states that "Garters were long thought to be nonvenomous, but recent discoveries have revealed that they do in fact produce a mild neurotoxic venom." The direct quotation mentioned above also includes a cited reference thus one would likely draw the conclusion that the article on Garter Snakes is correct. Although this may be considered a minor error, it is a contradiction in the information provided on the listed species and could affect the integrity of Wikipedia. I therefore suggest that the information in this article ( Massasauga Rattlesnake)be amended to state that the Massasauga Rattlesnake is one of only two known venomous species of snake in Michigan and Ontario. -- Greywolf ( talk) 17:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Are you kidding me?? Describing this species as a grey pit viper which is sometimes referred to as a rattlesnake really freaked me out for a while!! I was cross referencing all kinds of stuff trying to nail it down. It wasn't until I noticed an actual rattle in one of the pictures that I breathed a sigh of relief!
SOO.. How come NONE of you geniuses noticed that the descriptions of the RATTLEsnakes have completely left out any mention of the actual RATTLE??
..and you wonder why people question the validity of Wikipedia. Yeesh!!
I'm not even going to bother logging in to claim this 'rant', but could someone find an expert somewhere to do a rewrite of the descriptions? PLEASE?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.70.17 ( talk) 09:26, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
Snakes are often described as "shy". This is anthropomorphism, we do not know enough about snake mindset to use terms specific to humans in describing them. Snake tactics are hit and withdraw, that is different than shy. I have observed Mass. Rat. in the wild and some of their behaviour is aggressive by normal measures. It is also often pointed out that people only run afoul of Mass. Rat. through their own fault. This undermines snake conservation as people do not want to be faulted for doing normal things that may interfere with snakes. Warnings about unsafe behaviour are one thing, but blaming the "victim" does not advance the cause of snakes.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.44.187 ( talk) 17:49, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
I had a reference at one point that indicated that Mass. venom was very powerful and was not only a hemotoxin. This is a detail I was trying to confirm by visiting this site. The Michigan site states it is weak, while other sites state it is potent, but that the snakes often inject little or none (ignoring the fact there are big snakes within the type). The fact that the antivenin is not always available it is an important point, as snakebite survival rates are mostly predicated on availability of treatment. The Mass. in Ontario is present in proximity to humans, like Huntsville area, but also in wilderness areas where 2 hours to treatment is not going to happen, in part due to conditions, and in part due to local hospitals not being supplied with the antivenin, and in part because one can't move around a lot after the bite.
Another important point is the maiming the bites cause which is severe with the Mass. It is nice to survive, but there can be extensive tissue damage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.44.187 ( talk) 17:49, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved. BarrelProof made a bunch of similar requests at the end of August. See this version of the RM current discussions. All of BarrelProof's proposed moves of snakes to common name seem to have been performed. There wasn't a ton of participation, but there was enough. The person who made the most detailed response here was User:Fungus Guy. He withdrew his objection to the move, though I note he still prefers Massasauga rattlesnake. EdJohnston ( talk) 15:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Sistrurus catenatus → Massasauga – Per WP:COMMONNAME / WP:NCFAUNA, this well-known rattlesnake has a well-established and unambiguous common name, which is "massasauga". The suggested name is the original name of the article, which was moved in 2006 by someone who said "Scientific names should be used whenever possible to avoid confusion". That move seems contrary to the Wikipedia policy/guideline preference for the use of common names, so I suggest to revert it. A web search confirms that "massasauga" is roughly 5.8 times more common on the web than "Sistrurus catenatus" (and probably more that that if we restrict the scope to English-language sources). — BarrelProof ( talk) 05:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 ( talk) 01:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC)--Relisted. Tiggerjay ( talk) 20:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC),
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Massasauga. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 05:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Massasauga. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:11, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
The distribution map is not accurate (for example it does not show the range of this species anywhere in New York, where the article explicitly states it occurs). Where does this map come from? It appears to be "original research", and as such it does not belong on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 ( talk) 15:09, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
This appears to be a more reliable source, and as a government publication can probably be used without a copyright violation: https://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/7154.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 ( talk) 15:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus that the taxonomic change described in the nomination has taken hold in sources. ( non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 15:03, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Massasauga → Eastern massasauga – The taxonomy of this species has changed, with the subspecies all becoming species; the title of this page should reflect this. Chumzwumz68 ( talk) 00:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request ( permalink). — BarrelProof ( talk) 17:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. {{ping| ClydeFranklin}} ( t/ c) 23:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. {{ping| ClydeFranklin}} ( t/ c) 00:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you BarrelProof for the move. Now my point of view is that the name of the article should be "eastern massasauga" since there is already a western massasauga page, but it can be argued that simply "massasauga" is the most common name for this species. So I'm open to simply changing it to scientific name. Chumzwumz68 ( talk) 17:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Needs to be changed to ‘threatened’. [3] https://www.fws.gov/species/eastern-massasauga-sistrurus-catenatus 73.8.128.39 ( talk) 18:33, 20 July 2023 (UTC)