# Talk:Animal epithet

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Animal epithet. 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/20160729032257/http://www.scb.se/sv_/Hitta-statistik/Statistik-efter-amne/Befolkning/Amnesovergripande-statistik/Namnstatistik/30898/30905/Samtliga-folkbokforda--Efternamn-topplistor/31063/ to http://www.scb.se/sv_/Hitta-statistik/Statistik-efter-amne/Befolkning/Amnesovergripande-statistik/Namnstatistik/30898/30905/Samtliga-folkbokforda--Efternamn-topplistor/31063/
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) 06:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I recently added several examples of similes and metaphors to a table in this article, and which were reverted by Chiswick Chap on the basis that they were not in the one citation given and because they thought I was engaging in censorship. As I described in the original rationale, I “Replaced the vulgar version of profligate rabbit behavior with the more common version.”, viz. “fuck like rabbits” for ”breed like rabbits”. First, I used the term ”vulgar” as an adjective, like any good dictionary would, to distinguish it from the other term, “breed”. Second, the rationale is not censorship, it is education — using the more common phrase, the one given in the Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms , makes the example accessible to a larger audience. In the context of this article I believe this is a valuable improvement. If for some reason there was a need for a separate section on sexual similes and metaphors where this was placed in context, I would not have touched it. But because “breed” was not in the original article, I changed it a second time to another common synonym that *was* in the article, ”reproduce”. Once again, Chiswick Chap reverted it even though it now meets their criteria. So I appeal to the Talk page.
— Andy Anderson 10:48, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

We work by citing (reliable) sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

The paper [https://journal.fi/virittaja/article/download/39052/30210 ANIMAL THEMES lN VERNACULAR NAMES
OF WlLD-GROWING PLANTS] (in Finnish) indicates a possible section of this article, along the lines of 'houndstongue' for a plant. Might be worth including. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2024 (UTC)