Talk:Amblypygi

message: Why is the list of genera a separate page?  WormRunner 01:47, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: This article failed the GA noms due to lack of references. Tarret 21:15, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: Just watched an episode of Life in the Undergrowth and these creatures were referred to as "whip spiders". I checked using Google and apparently this name is quite common. I wanted to add a redirect pointing to this article, but decided to ask here first, because biology isn't a subject I know much about. --Jashiin (talk) 07:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whip spiders? 

message: WTucker wrote (Everything I can find says tailless whip scorpion with a couple of mentions of whip spider)
That is because many people posting are not scientists. Many laymen call the amblypygids by the name false whip scorpion, tailless whip scorpion etc, but in fact whip scorpions belong to the suborder Uropygi, and the whip spiders to the Amblypygi This is a fact. And I have seen and collected these different animals in caves in SE Asia.
You can see pic of Uropygi and Amblypygids on  Wiki and there it is clear they are totally different animals.
Cavingliz (talk) 03:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely, and I understand the difference.  I know that Amblypygi and Uropygi are totally different creatures.  But, the common names (even if misguided) are just that -- common names.  Tailless whip scorpion and whip spider appear to be two common names for Amblypygids even if "scorpion" is misleading.  I would argue that "spider" is misleading, too.  But, they are the common names and are the names which are used in the references -- weak as they are.  I have never had the privilege of visiting caves in SE Asia so I am no expert on the subject.  I am only going by the references before me and those already in the article.  If you feel a strong need to remove the phrase again, I will not change it.  But, please update the references in the rest of the article so that the common name doesn't just appear out of the blue to the uninformed reader.  Better yet, explain how the name is a misnomer, preferably with references. WTucker (talk) 04:15, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I decided after further reflection to follow your lead on this.  I have updated the article.  How does that look?  WTucker (talk) 05:05, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Tailless whip scorpion is nevertheless a common term that exists and it would be incorrect to remove the name. Common names do not have to reflect scientific taxonomy. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/580747/tailless-whip-scorpion, http://www.jstor.org/pss/3705513 It would be a good idea to restore the common name in the lead. Shyamal (talk) 06:04, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

text: "Tailless whip scorpions"' are different from "whip scorpions". "Whip spiders" incidentally refer to spiders in the genus Argyrodes at least in Australia. Folk taxonomy rarely reflects the views from molecular phylogenetics, and it is not always necessary to say that the English names do not reflect phylogenetic relationship. Incidentally, the name scorpion is used in folksonomy due to the chelicera and if you see Arachnid you will see that the Uropygi are in a clade with the Amblypygi and even closer to the Schizomida. Shyamal (talk) 04:55, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So while we're at it, lets change horseshoe crab since that incorrectly identifies them as being crabs. --PixieDragon (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Whip spiders

message: I know some whipscorpions are poisonous, but the whipspiders...? - EH  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.86.104.28 (talk) 20:59, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no indication that they are poisonous. In fact, they are described as "totally harmless". As you have indicated, they are not to be confused with Whip scorpions. Do you have a better source of information? WTucker (talk) 01:00, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: these spiders are poisonous?

message: The entire section has not a single reference and sounds like it is based mostly on personal experience. I doubt that many people come to this article looking for breeding tips, so the section could likely be removed. Pullarius1 (talk) 01:02, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Poor sourcing in the Care section

message: I think the description of the size of these animals is kind of exaggerated. A leg span of 60 cm would make them the biggest arachnids on earth (except some deep sea species), since most other arachnids rarely exceed 30 cm of leg span. --79.243.255.236 (talk) 10:59, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: first of all, there are no aquatic, let alone deep sea arachnid species. If you're referring to sea spiders, they are chelicerates, but not arachnids. second, I have heard qualified keepers report sizes in the range of 60cm, and personally seen a photograph of a specimen with a legspan of 18 inches (45 cm). These numbers refer to the span of the antenniform first pair of legs, the walking legspan is smaller Jsamson2001 (talk) 10:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  60 cm 

message: I have seen one of these spiders in the Fraser Valley of BC, Canada....as it is quite wet here and warming up due to climate change. First time I thought it was a scorpion without a tail, then realized it was a spider with scorpion like appendages. So these spiders are moving north.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.1.19.171 (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found in tropical and subtropical environments *humid* 

message: Substituted at 17:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Amblypygi. 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/20080517002449/http://www.americanarachnology.org/JoA_Congress/JoA_v27_n1/arac_27_01_0103.pdf to http://www.americanarachnology.org/JoA_Congress/JoA_v27_n1/arac_27_01_0103.pdf
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) 12:05, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified