Talk:Microchaetus rappi

Animals Low‑importance

Microchaetus rappi is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or images be included in this article to improve its quality.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Untitled

I've noticed that the two sources provided for this species are irrelevant and do not include any details about it, nor even mention it. They seem very unreliable, and I question whether this species even exists. All the image results that showed up when I searched its scientific name on Google images showed the giant Gippsland earthworm of Australia.

I think we may have a hoax on our hands. I recommend the deletion of this page if reliable sources cannot be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RomeoBatGuy (talk • contribs) 07:26, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. You might be right. But look here. I Google scholared "Microchaetus rappi" in quotes and found the term mentioned in twelve different scholarly sources.

But still, even if it's not a hoax, something is wrong because the next taxon superior to this one we have is the order Haplotaxida, and it doesn't mention any such family within the order.

Let's link this to a Wikiproject that would be most interested.

But which one would be most appropriate? I don't think it's WikiProjectAnimals. We should choose something more specific or maybe start a thread with WP:TREEOFLIFE better yet.

What's your opinion? Chrisrus (talk) 22:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely not a hoax. 22 foot specimens have been confirmed and it is mentioned in the Guiness book of world records. John Alan Elson★ WF6I A.P.O.I. 02:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree that it's likely not a hoax, but as of now, one of the two references links to a dead page and the other links to what seems to be the Worm Digest home page. Using the taxon identifiers I tracked down the following two links, but I don't know if either of them really provide enough detail to be used as sources. It should be noted that the first link seems to list the original scholarly article that named and described the species in 1885 or 86. http://earthworm.uw.hu/index.php?page=0&genus=Microchaetus&sort=SPECIES&desc=0 http://africaninvertebrates.org/ojs/index.php/AI/article/view/255 Astrocom (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Showing up in a taxonomic list doesn't prove it's not a hoax. The species was likely described at one point but the numbers might be completely fudged. Anyone can grab a niche species name from a literature review and just make up sizes and weight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:3005:1400:1600:65B9:F785:E7BD:3BD0 (talk) 06:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Microchaetus rappi. 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/20090219141951/http://www.wormdigest.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=2 to http://www.wormdigest.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 16:51, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]