Talk:Australian funnel-web spider

message: Does anyone know why the formatting of this page has changed? The first paragraph has been reduced to a strip about one inch wide.
Thanks.
Patrick0Moran 05:30, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably an issue with the software update, and could well be a browser specific thing (looks fine for me). --Robert Merkel 06:06, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: formatting

message: What does this mean? That the spider dies after injecting venom, or what? Loganberry (Talk) 00:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: True, but I didn't edit since I know very little about this spider beyond about two sub-plots on Aussie soaps. Loganberry (Talk) 22:51, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The spider will always come off worse in an encounter with a human." 

message: "Sydney" is not the only geographical nickname for these spiders, and actually the so called Sydney funnel-web spider is only one of several deadly spiders (from P0M's edit summary). Uncle Ed 22:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "moving" notes

message: I removed the comment about the spider "envonomat[ing] enthusiastically" it was redundant (after "may bite repeteadly) and read like personification. Zanerock 21:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Avoid Personification

message: The araneomorph funnel-web spider not to be confused with the funnel-web tarantula and the venomous funnel-web tarantula, both of which are members of the suborder Mygalomorphae.
The venomous funnel-web tarantulas include the infamous Sydney funnel-web spider.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Araneomorph_funnel-web_spider
---
The highly venomous genus Atrax used to be placed in this family, but is now in the Hexathelidae.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funnel-web_tarantula
---
The Sydney funnel-web spider (also incorrectly called a funnel-web tarantula)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_funnel-web_spider
---
So is it a Tarantula or not?
:I've never favored the "tarantula" designation. It is in the same sub-order with the Theraphosidae, but not everyone in the world calls those spiders "tarantulas" -- a misnomer to begin with because people confused them with Lycosa tarentula, called the "Tarantula spider." (Spelling difference comes from two similar names for the same city in Italy.) 
:The main thing that needs to be sorted out is the relative venomosity of the two genera.  What appeared to me to be the most authoratative document said that Atrax bites more people but has somewhat less serious venom.  Possibly we will need to account for both opinions, but the bottom line is that you don't want to get bitten by either kind. P0M 10:06, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to Sydney Funnel Web (Atrax) are not consistent 

message: This article focuses only on the two genera (Atrax and Hadronyche) known to be problem biters in Australia and nearby regions.  But there are several other genera in Hexathelidae.  One notable one is Macrothele, which contains some rather venomous (to man) spiders in Taiwan, Vietnam, and China; as well as a few far-less-harmful species in Europe.  Perhaps these should be included, or else a separate article on the family as a whole should be written?
--EngineerScotty 19:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other genera in Hexathelidae 

message: I removed a claim that female Sydney funnel-webs are the "most deadly spiders in the world", or somesuch.  For one thing, it is the male funnel-webs which are more dangerous to humans; they're bigger, and they go out wandering (placing them in more frequent contact with people).  This is the opposite of the black widow, where it's the female that is dangerous. 
For another, there isn't really a basis for proclaiming one spider the "most deadly"; fans of the Brazilian wandering spider or the Six-eyed sand spider might have reason to object; their bites can be as nasty as funnel-web bites.  (And six-eyed sand spider bites have no antivenom).  Of course, the various widow spiders, including the redback spider, still hold the record--by a longshot--for most people killed, even though their venom is less toxic than funnel-web venom.  Within the genera Atrax and Hadronyche, there's ample evidence that several spiders in Hadronyche (such as H. infensa, the Fraser Island funnel-web) are at least as dangerous as A. robustus, if not more so.  The various species of Hadronyche aren't found in a major metropolitan area like Sydney, however, and thus have less frequently bitten people.
--EngineerScotty 16:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most deadly spiders? 

message: I noticed there's been a lot of vandalism here - and currently, under the heading 'Range, habitat, and diet' there is a final sentence reading 'how about u suck my nuts ok'. I can't see how to remove this at all - it doesn't seem to be anywhere in the content. Someone with Admin privileges needs to deal with this.
- Matt
:It seems to be o.k. now.  One of the problems has been that the cached data has been slow to update lately, so maybe it was already fixed, but the fix wasn't showing up.  Anyway, thanks for the heads up. P0M 20:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: The heading says "Australasian funnel-web spider", but the article does not explain why they are called "Australasian". In fact it says they are found in Oz and some Pacific islands which seems to me to rule out Asia. Also, the term "funnel-web" isn't defined either. 222.153.233.112 02:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The heading isn't explained in the article

message: Is it acidic or basic? Can't be both at the same time! Donal Fellows 14:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  pH of Venom? 

message: Australasian funnel-web spider → Australian funnel-web spider — Rather then moving the article and finding out someone may disagree I'm going to request a move rather then move it. I've found very little backing of the name "Australasian funnel-web spider" and sites that use that name are mirroring Wikipedia's content however I've found that "Australian funnel-web spider" is widely used on a number of sites therefore the Common name should be used. — Bidgee (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: –Drilnoth (T • C) 19:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support Agree with Bidgee. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 06:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Any additional comments:
Is there any non-Australia funnel-web in "Australasia"? --Merbabu (talk) 14:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

text: I've not found any. Bidgee (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you check New Zealand swimming pools? --Merbabu (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've checked over the "ditch" but nothing found yet but may have to check out my pair of red back boots ;). Bidgee (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Support Agree with Bidgee. Aaroncrick(Tassie talk) 06:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Any additional comments:
Is there any non-Australia funnel-web in "Australasia"? --Merbabu (talk) 14:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've not found any. Bidgee (talk) 14:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you check New Zealand swimming pools? --Merbabu (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've checked over the "ditch" but nothing found yet but may have to check out my pair of red back boots ;). Bidgee (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: I removed the taxobox: the article refers to species in two genera sharing a common name. As pointed out above, the name does not refer to the family or one its subfamilies. cygnis insignis 02:57, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Taxobox

message: I was surprised to see such a detailed uncited list in the following statement: Although extremely toxic to primates, the venom [of funnel-web spiders] appears to be fairly harmless to many other animals, including dogs, cats, horses, rabbits, bears, ostriches, peafowl, leopards, turtles, snakes, elephants, giraffes, ducks, moose, tigers, donkeys, walruses, seals, lions, kangaroos, koalas, iguanas, wolves, weasels, guinea-pigs, chickens and even cane toads. Has this come from Taronga Zoo--the only place where European, American, African, Asian and Antarctic species are likely to be (very rarely) envenomated by an Australian funnel-web spider?! Is this information a piece of original research, or has there been appropriate experimentation and documentation of such conclusions?  Until there are good answers to that question, I believe it is reasonable to replace the statement with something that can be cited, even if not with a proper scientific source, e.g., ...mammals such as mice, rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs and cats are relatively immune and often survive 100 times the human lethal dosage... Dr Graham Nicholson, a funnel-web expert from the University of Technology in Sydney, puts our unusual sensitivity to the toxin down to "simple bad luck". He says there's no question humans and funnel webs evolved independently and our susceptibility probably has something to do with the wiring of our highly-evolved primate brains...Shorter D Great Australian bites--Three of the worst from Australian ABC 'Science Lab' site 
Does anyone have any objections to this, or alternative suggestions? Cheers Bjenks (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: --Being the very point made at the top of our article. Bjenks (talk) 04:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Aye, aye! That has to be left out! But the authority of Dr Graham might be worth investigating some more; or another more useful and 'scientific' citation can surely be found. Cheers Bjenks (talk) 04:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxicity in primates vs other animals 

message: Somebody called attention to this problem a while back. The article currently says:
Envenomation symptoms observed following bites by these spiders are very similar. The bite is initially very painful, due to the acidity of the venom.
It has been suggested that these animals may be resistant to the venom's effects due to the presence of IgG, and possibly cross-linked IgG and IgM inactivating factors in their blood plasma that bind to the toxins responsible and neutralise them, or it may involve a non-specific reaction due to the highly basic nature of the toxins.
I don't have time right now to do fact checking, but it's hard to see how both of these statements could be true.P0M (talk) 01:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Highy basic nature of toxins in acidic venom? 

message: Some sources say that Sydney funnel-webs have killed 13 people in recorded cases  although Funnel-web spider bite: a systematic review of recorded clinical cases does not appear to back this up and lists the 13 deaths simply as funnel-web bites. The antivenom introduced in 1981 was developed specifically for bites from the Sydney funnel-web, and the Australian Reptile Park says that "The only known killer is the Sydney funnel-web spider.". However, other sourcing, and the article here, says that the Northern tree funnel-web Hadronyche formidabilis has also caused at least one death. The sourcing on this issue is confusing and contradictory, and the problem is that not all spider bites result in the species and genus being identified reliably.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:43, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly the problem I pointed out earlier. Most of the descriptions here properly belong to the Sydney funnel web spider article. Including the "most dangerous" claim. I'd honestly be alright with removing those sections in the meantime, until it can be clarified. The name "Australian funnel-web spider" can not even be attested, and is not used in academic sources. All mentions of "Australian funnel-web spider" I've found are talking (inexpertly I might add) about Atrax robustus as a species, rather than Atracinae as a subfamily.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 21:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The media tends to use the term "funnel-web" when what it really means is "Sydney funnel-web". The request for the public to catch funnel-webs is a good example, as this story clarifies that the Australian Reptile Park milks male Sydney funnel-webs for their venom. The participating hospitals (Sydney, Newcastle and Wollongong) are all in New South Wales.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relative danger of different funnel-webs 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Australian funnel-web spider. 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  tag to http://www.anaes.med.usyd.edu.au/venom/spiders.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050515232341/http://www.amonline.net.au:80/factsheets/funnelweb.htm to http://www.amonline.net.au/factsheets/funnelweb.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This is in the news today. May be worth adding.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:04, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I meant to put something on Hadronyche infensa Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of venom for treatment of strokes - March 2017 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Australian funnel-web spider. 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/20031208183121/http://www.arachnology.org/Arachnology/Pages/Araneae.html to http://www.arachnology.org/Arachnology/Pages/Araneae.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060415075002/http://www.arachnology.org/Arachnology/Pages/Atrax.html to http://www.arachnology.org/Arachnology/Pages/Atrax.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amonline.net.au/factsheets/funnelweb.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The treatment information has many occurrences of "should", which seems to be against WP:NOTMANUAL. It needs re-writing to report advice, rather than give it. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:44, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed and trimmed some of the material. A person who suspects that they have been bitten by a funnel-web spider should seek medical advice immediately, but the Wikipedia article is not a medical handbook.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 10:27, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Rewriting, not removing, just present the facts. The article jumps from a bite victim, a crepe bandage and a sit-down to antivenom appearing from somewhere if things go horribly wrong. Do I have to get out of my chair to get any source on spiders and medical emergencies, and what happens when the huge numbers of people ring Poisons information about a black spider bite? cygnis insignis 16:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is possible to describe recommended medical treatment(s), I agree. But the description must be a factual summary of one or more sources that meet the requirements of WP:MEDRS. WP:NOTMANUAL is a policy which was simply not being followed. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:36, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted it because it had clear WP:NOTGUIDE problems. If a person has a medical problem, Wikipedia is not a guidebook in these situations. It is enough to say that a person with a suspected funnel-web bite should seek medical advice immediately.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:13, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I agree entirely with the initial removal; there were absolutely clear WP:NOTGUIDE problems. However, if you look at most articles about medical problems, whether diseases or injuries, they do describe recommended treatments. But this has to be done in a way that doesn't prescribe them. Anyway, it's better as it is, for sure. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:53, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Phoneutria doesn't say anything about what to do if bitten by one. In line with the General disclaimer, Wikipedia isn't intended to provide professional advice. When John Gambrill was bitten by a funnel-web he became ill very quickly and had to go to hospital.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not manual 

message: If you found one of these things in your house how would you kill it? Somehow a can of Raid doesn't seem like it'd do the trick. The thing is big enough it looks like you'd need a gun.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.138.90.39 (talk) 09:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: If you hit one with a rolled up newspaper it will grab the newspaper and hit you back. David notMD (talk) 11:04, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  how would you kill one of these spiders? 

message: This information is incorrect. An early 20’s man died within an hour of being bitten in about 2016 119.18.1.15 (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Was it this case from April 2016? This involved a redback spider bite (ie a black widow). The news article says that this was "believed to be the country’s first fatality from a spider in almost 40 years" but it wasn't a funnel-web.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:45, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fact check