Talk:Chipmunk

message: On a name "chipmunk" was an Indian word, probably from the Algonquin languages; not onomatopoeic.  Can anyone prove me right or wrong?  Then again, if it was an Algonquin word, perhaps they took it from onomatopoeia.
:That's right. "Chipmunk" comes from the Ojibwe word ajidamoo (pronounced approximately like "uh-jid-duh-mow"), which means "red squirrel." English speakers applied the name to chipmunks, and changed the name by analogy with the existing English words "chip" (probably also influenced by its vocalizations, but that's speculation on my part) and "mink". This is partly attested by the fact that it used to be spelled "chitmunk", anyway. See , , and , for example (the word may have been borrowed from the Southeastern dialect of Ojibwe, where the word is ajidamoonh, with a nasalized final vowel, as in French, which would explain the n in the English borrowing and in the sources I just gave, but that's more speculation on my part). I'm going to change the etymology given in the article. --Whimemsz 04:56, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Close.  The word for "red squirrel" in the Anishinaabe language is indeed ajidamoo, but the word "chipmunk" in English comes from the Odaawaa Language form for ajidamoo: jidmoonh. CJLippert 17:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Chipmunks are listed on the list of common household pests. Information on how to get rid of them or otherwise dissuade them from scampering around inside the walls of a house should be added Pendragon39 16:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Household pest 

message: Recently I did a week long workshop at Frostburg State University in Western  Maryland, I just would like to make note that I saw almost no squirrels there, but a high number of rabbits and even more so chipmunks, I was wondering if this possibly common on other campuses as well, as I read the Squirrel article and it mention the activity of squirrel's on Campuses I just figured it might be something that might want to be addressed on this page. Arkkeeper (talk) 16:16, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Activeness on College Campus 

message: I intend to update the Wikipedia article to add the genera Neotamias and Eutamias recognized by molecular work by Piaggio and Spicer (2000, 2001) and reconfirmed by Banbury and Spicer (2007).Strawmd (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy 

message: I feel that the description of the chipmunk on the hand is a little deceptive. I do not believe the hand was included in the photograph soley for size comparison, and was instead only included due to selfish reasons expressed by the photographer (the photographer wanting to interact with the chipmunk due to humans strong desire to form inter-species relationships espically with the small mammals).
219.90.192.25 (talk) 03:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chipmunk on hand 

message: This is a notice to inform interested editors of a new WikiProject being proposed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Rodents --﻿ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 02:05, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Rodents 

message: Please fix spelling in link text by changing
arder hoarding and scatter hoarding
to
larder hoarding and scatter hoarding
(ie arder -> larder)
124.149.37.121 (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for the suggestion. Ucucha 12:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 124.149.37.121, 4 April 2010 

message: We needn't slavishly follow the 5-year-old Mammal Species of the World, and scientists like Guy Musser has supported the split of Tamias , which is based on each of the chipmunk groups being at least as distinct as any of the other genera of the Marmotini. I also doubt that most taxonomies over the past century have followed the one-genus taxonomy from what older books I've seen, but I have no reason to believe the opposite either. —innotata 18:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: I'm aware of the nuances of original research, and I don't get why you'd call my reference to this Google Books listing OR:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22chipmunk%22&tbs=bks:1,cdr:1,cd_min:1800,cd_max:1834&lr=lang_en
  
I've just eliminated the words "catalogued in Google Books" and turned the link into a reference, which it certainly is. I hope that sets your mind at ease. I suppose one could make separate references for each of the individual books, but that would merely be cumbersome. I don't think an efficient reference to a group of sources is OR--any more than, say, a reference to a Google NGRAM graph would be, even though it accumulates data from innumerable sources. And contrary to what you claimed in your edit summary, almost all of the books listed are clearly scans of the original 1820s and 1830s books. I'm guessing the second one caught your eye, but it's an exception. Jbening (talk) 00:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chipmonk or chipmunk in earliest sources 

message: Hi, I was looking up references today and found some/added.  I tried to reference the statement that "bluebirds have been observed energetically mobbing chipmunks" but ran out of steam.  This exact phrase is used in at least a dozen internet sites, but I was unable to find a suitable reference for the item which was tagged for citation.   Would it be better for the article to say that birds attack chipmunks, that would be easier to reference?   --Cityside (let's talk! - contribs) 22:03, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  bluebird reference 

message: I have looked everywhere, and when I search for chipmouse as an animal, I am sent to chipmunk pages. So are chipmunks also chipmice? LA (T) @ 08:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can a  chipmunk also be called a chipmouse? 

message: There is a chance of confusion. I myself have personally confused them before, as they look similar. Comfycozybeds (talk) 16:11, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically they are squirrels, though, so use of  is not appropriate here (though if I'd been the one reverting your changes, I would have given you a reason 😉).  To elaborate, note that at the bottom of the page you can see that Chipmunk is in :Category:Squirrels.  If you click on Tribe: Marmotini in the taxobox, you can see that the canonical name for that article is "Ground squirrel", and it includes the text "The term is most often used for the medium-sized ground squirrels, as the larger ones are more commonly known as marmots (genus Marmota) or prairie dogs, while the smaller and less bushy-tailed ground squirrels tend to be known as chipmunks."  Finally, in the last paragraph of , you can see that some alternate names include the word "squirrel".  --Dan Harkless (talk) 02:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distinguish 

message: There is no indication of the range of sizes in this article other than "small"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.57.79 (talk) 08:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "small" 

message: Folks, i have no idea how y'all can offer the population ranges that you do for the chipmunk, and for the "siberian chipmunk". These montsters are all ver northern India, they're absolutely endemic in urban areas. They have typical chipmunk stripes (even accounted for in 3000 year old mythological texts). They're no import, they're local. Yet the chipmunk page says nothing... and the squirrel page says that all chipmunks are squirrels, anyhow. 
Somebody needs to make the information accurate and global. North American information biases are boring.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.79.143.52 (talk) 03:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Its most likely that you are seeing Indian palm squirrels or Northern palm squirrels. They are not chipmunks. Regards.Orenburg1 (talk) 15:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Gilaheri from the Indian subcontinent 

message: The following comment does not make sense to me.  The phrase can be found on the right hand side above the chipmunk image.  
Temporal range: Early Miocene to Recent
According to the Miocene link, Miocine is s geological epoch of the Neogene Period  not a Temporal Range. 
Is there an explanation for this?  
Temporal relates to time.  Temporal Range can be deciphered as Time Range.  Makes sense
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:1500:8C02:3005:9F94:B2CD:4343 (talk) 23:46, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporal range: Early Miocene to Recent 

message: This article should be linked to the articles about chipmunks in other languages e.g. Streifenhörnchen in German or Pręgowiec in Polish. StefaniaPikus (talk) 19:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: This needs to be done via Wikidata. I'll go beyond the call of duty and see what I can do, but inter-wiki links are usually not handled locally so prefer fixing it via Wikidata directly if possible. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  02:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  See this; and this (which appears to be the Wikidata item actually linked on the German page, the equivalent here being Tamias). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs)  02:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2021 

message: Half the videos are of red squirrels not chipmunks.  Can someone correct? 2601:40D:301:5F80:1D63:B532:DBA1:8A78 (talk) 13:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Videos of chipmunks 

message: Add more specific statement about acorn preferences after stating they like to eat acorns under Chipmunk diet to the diet portion
Eastern chipmunks prefer to eat white oak acorns over red oak acorns, in the absence of beech nuts. White oak acorns are smaller in size and their ability to handle these may influence their preference in acorns. Jaybae30 Pyare, S., Kent, J. A., Noxon, D. L., & Murphy, M. T. (1993). Acorn Preference and Habitat Use in Eastern Chipmunks. The American Midland Naturalist, 130(1), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.2307/2426285 (talk) 22:52, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2022 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Microbear and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at  until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  TNstingray (talk) 20:11, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Microbear" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: These 3 genus (Tamias, Eutamias and Neotamias) are now part of a different tribe: Tamiini, not Marmotini anymore.
See https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/1279829-Tamiini
Correct me if I am missing something, or if I am wrong. Sintropepe (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1055790303003786?casa_token=HxKrmgg94csAAAAA:3uhN6Cgc-S38priw-NgAPHaNm9RIHFRqO4qtwUb2SLmwg8E7hr7LI1E1VyUwKbZBh_Ny_3cH9PM Sintropepe (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy: Tribe Tamiini