Talk:Short-beaked echidna

Short-beaked echidna is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 24, 2006, and on June 11, 2023.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 7, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 20, 2005	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

Australia: Biota High‑importance

	Australia portal Short-beaked echidna is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Mammals: Monotremes and Marsupials Mid‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials (assessed as Mid-importance).

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia articles

Listen to this page (18 minutes)

This audio file was created from a revision of this page dated 26 June 2006, and does not reflect subsequent edits.

Physical description

In preparation for the production of a spoken version of this article, I'd like to change:

The limbs of the Short-beaked Echidna are adapted for rapid digging, having short limbs and powerful claws.

which reads a little awkwardly, to:

The limbs of the Short-beaked Echidna are adapted for rapid(very fast) digging, being short and having powerful claws.

or something similar, if anyone can come up with an improvement. I'll do this in a few days, if nobody objects. Macropode 07:30, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reads clearer to me.--cj | talk 09:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article of the Day

Can someone with more expertise than me request this article for Featured Article of the Day? I think it's worthy. Bibliomaniac15 00:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hatchlings are about 1.5 mm long and weigh between 0.3 and 0.4 grams.

No animal 1.5mm long can weight as much as 0.3 grams. Remember 1cm^3 of water weighs approximatley 1 gram. I'd say max would be <0.1 grams. I'm assuming since the article states that they eggs are around 13 to 15 mm in diameter it should say "Hatchlings are about 1.5 cm long and weigh between 0.3 and 0.4 grams."

New Guinea name

The species is found throughout Australia, where it is the most widespread native mammal, and in coastal and highland regions of southwestern New Guinea, where it is known as the Mungwe.

In what language? New Guinea is one of the most linguistically diverse places on the planet, and somehow I doubt all the languages there use the same name. Is this an Indonesian word, or a Tok Pisin word, or what? --Ptcamn 05:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Petaholmes! --Ptcamn 23:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daribi and Chimbu languages are spoken in the Karimui and Simbu regions of the eastern highlands area. Is this even necessary or useful? I suggest this be deleted. One could search out a whole list of PNG tribal names, and Australian Aboriginal names as well, but to what purpose? Ptilinopus (talk) 02:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most common echidna?

I read pretty much the whole article before finally realising that this article describes what most australians would call 'the echidna'. Could it be better explained in the introduction that this is by far the most common echidna found in Australia, and is the most well known, rather than being buried down in the "cultural references" section, or requiring a visit to echidna? Stevage 08:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

Hello! I would recommend you to protect this article! If not, the spammers will continue messing up this nice article. Admins, where are you? Then we should restore the right version.. Tilmandralle 16:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they'll keep messing it up, and we will keep reverting it. The featured article of the day should never be protected: User:Raul654/protection —Keenan Pepper 16:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you for answering. So we'll keep reverting :-) Tilmandralle 16:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who is messing with this? Are you referring to the They Might Be Giants addition in cultural references? That is a FACT. Why don't you make sure you don't delete the truth from the spam. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.215.25.252 (talk • contribs) .

Do they mention this species by name, or just echidna in general? - UtherSRG (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question

The genus Zagl... has only one species in it, and so I can't understand the logic in this sentence: "This has conservation implications for the endangered species of echidna from the genus Zaglossus, and to a lesser extent for the Short-beaked Echidna". (Sorry for my bad english), Ybk33 00:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your question is answered by going to the Zaglossus article.... there are three species in Zaglossus. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FAR

This article might end up at WP:FAR due to a lack of citations. Judging by the list at WP:URFA it will probably get nominated soon as people work through the 2005 list and those are being worked through. YellowMonkey (cricket photo poll!) paid editing=POV 06:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other two sources of Stamps

I'm translating from this article to Japanese article now. I found two sources of stamps in 1974 and in 1987 which is on the Echidna, but I'm not sure whether can I add these source on the article or not because I don't know rules of English Wikipedia well. Then I'm writing this information;

Stamp Collections: Wild Animals and Lizards: There is a stamp of the Echidna in 1974 in Australia Section.
1987 Wildlife II Definitives MUH Australia Stamp Set : I found this set on eBay, so google it by this name.

At least, those stamps were issued. Regards--Koolah (talk) 08:47, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to sound rude, but given your poor English writing skills, you shouldn't be writing on the English wiki. Thanks for the sources though. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for writing in my poor English. If you don't like my edit, please revert it.--Koolah (talk) 02:10, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ameisenigel Unterseite-drawing.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ameisenigel Unterseite-drawing.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012

What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What pouch? What burrow?

The top of the article refers to baby echnidas moving out of their mothers' pouches and burrows (Baby echidnas eventually grow too large and spiky to stay in the pouch and, at around six months of age, they leave the burrow). However, there is nothing in the article that explains a) when, where and how the egg hatches; b) that the mother has a pouch and the baby climbs in; and c) what burrow all this is taking place in. Can someone add more information? Risssa (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

More sub-headings

I feel navigation about this article would benefit by having more headings/sub-headings, for example "Senses" and "Adaptations" with relevant sub-headings. Normally, I would be bold in my editing and do this, however, it is a featured article and therefore a lot of work has already been done and my headings might therefore cause a little controversy. What do people think about the addition of headings?__DrChrissy (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Short-beaked echidna. 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.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 13:39, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Range

The article describes the range outside Australia, as coastal and highland regions of southwestern New Guinea. As the map shows, this in incorrect. Southwestern New Guinea would refer to a large part of Indonesian New Guinea, but it is almost entirely in Papua New Guinea, which is the eastern half of the island. And even if one meant to say southwestern Papua New Guinea, it would still be incorrect, as the populations in the southeast of Indonesian Papua, and in the southeast coast, the highlands, and the Huon Peninsula of Papua New Guinea do not fit that descriptor either. I have changed it therefore to “eastern New Guinea”. Ptilinopus (talk) 02:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

URFA

Jimfbleak might we mark this older FA as “Satisfactory” at WP:URFA/2020? leaving it to you, not watchlisting, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Range map

I find the geographical warping in File:Short-beaked Echidna area.png unsatisfactory, especially for a Featured Article. The map template used wasn't designed for singling out regions on the far edges such as Australasia. I could create an unwarped version if that would be considered desirable. While I'm at it, I wonder whether it would be desirable to create a single map for all extant species / subspecies of monotreme, with each taxon shown in a different colour? 15:35, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Sure, unwarp away! An all-monotremes map might work quite well because there's not a lot of confusing overlap - just platypus and short-beaked echidna; might use an extra colour for the overlap region. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:25, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I made an attempt. I decided to exclude the platypus to avoid overlapping, and the platypus already has a quality range map anyway. So it is a range map of all extant echidnas. I also decided to exclude showing subspecies separately as I wasn't able to find reliable information about the exact delineation of one subspecies from another. Please feel free to make suggestions for improvement, and I may make a second edition if needed. Ypna (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, thanks! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I propose merging Kangaroo Island short-beaked echidna into Short-beaked echidna. There is nothing in this newly created article which can not be here; the creator has already reverted the redirect.Ymblanter (talk) 08:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It should either be redirected or deleted. There was only one self-published blog as a source, so there's nothing to merge. DrKay (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some studies on morphology

Hello, in my free time, i like to search for weights studies of mammals. I currently have weight studies of about 2300 species and about 9000 entries that I oversee thoroughly.

Here are some on this animal, that might or might not be in the article (but i'm thinking not !) :

Tate, G. H. H. (1952). Weights of Queensland Mammals. Journal of Mammalogy, 33(1), 117–118. doi:10.1093/jmammal/33.1.117

Abensperg-Traun, M. (1991). A study of home range, movements and shelter use in adult and juvenile echidnas, Tachyglossus aculeatus (Monotremata: Tachyglossidae), in Western Australian wheatbelt reserves. Australian Mammalogy, 14(1), 13-21.

Wilkinson, D. A., Grigg, G. C., & Beard, L. A. (1998). Shelter selection and home range of echidnas, Tachyglossus aculeatus, in the highlands of south-east Queensland. Wildlife Research, 25(3), 219-232.

Peggy D. Rismiller, Michael W. McKelvey. 2000. Frequency of Breeding and Recruitment in the Short-Beaked Echidna, Tachyglossus Aculeatus. Journal of Mammalogy, Volume 81, Issue 1, February 2000, Pages 1–17.

Nicol, S., & Andersen, N. A. (2007). The life history of an egg-laying mammal, the echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus). Ecoscience, 14(3), 275-285.

Nicol, S. C., Andersen, N. A., Morrow, G. E., & Harris, R. L. (2018). Spurs, sexual dimorphism and reproductive maturity in Tasmanian echidnas (Tachyglossus aculeatus setosus). Australian Mammalogy, 41(2), 161-169.

Just wanted to help a bit :) Gimly24 (talk) 13:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spinal cord length in curling-up species

Is the spinal cord of Armadillos also very short? And that of the other two varieties of spiny curling up "hedgehogs" - the European hedgehog and the Madagascan Pigmy Tenrec?

It isn't obvious to me that having long nerve roots and a short cord is required, or specially helpful, in curling up into a ball. One needs a bit of slack and/or stretchy wiring certainly. An argument from several species would be interesting, and more convincing of association rather than coincidence. Midgley (talk) 06:06, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]