Talk:Scyllarides latus
 | Scyllarides latus has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 31, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that all that remains of the type specimen of the Mediterranean slipper lobster (pictured) is a 16th century watercolour? | |||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Israel
[edit]- An annual catch of 2–3 tonnes (2,000–3,000 kg) has been reported for Israel.
I find this numbr remarkable since lobsters are not kosher. Should it be mentioned? --Error (talk) 21:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Type specimen
[edit]Is there any information on what happened to the type specimen? (e.g. fire/flood/lost/stolen/eaten/sold to private collector/etc) I tried to go to the reference listed, but I'm getting an "Internal Server Error" on the website. -- 174.21.224.109 (talk) 22:33, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- It was collected long before the idea of preserving a museum specimen had come about. I would guess it was eaten, but there's no way of knowing. --Stemonitis (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Taxobox image
[edit]@Stemonitis:, the image I used for the taxobox is the correct ID, and a much better, sharper image than what was there originally. It shows far more detail and accurate coloring. Not sure why you're saying it is an incorrect id. Atsme📞📧 15:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Scyllarides latus does not occur in the Cayman Islands, according to the text, to the IUCN link (inc. map), and every other source I've seen. Other species do, however. --Stemonitis (talk)
- Ok, I stand corrected and apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused. Atsme📞📧 15:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- No problem at all. It's actually better to have a new picture of S. aequinoctialis (if that turns out to be the correct ID), and this interaction has flagged up some dead links in the article (and probably many others) which I will now fix, so all's well that ends well. --Stemonitis (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)