Talk:Inland taipan

message: * About it's range, the first two specimens ever found were much further south, in the Murray basin, in the 19th century. None has ever been seen there since and the species was thought extinct. It was identified again in QLD circa 1950. It had in fact been quite well known to locals who called it a "brown snake" even though it looks nothing like the Australian brown snake. The range found on the map is suspect. I'm pretty sure it is also found further south, into the south-western part of the state.
* I have moved the following: Image:Fiercerange.jpg and have replaced it with a newer image of the distribution (range) of the Fierce Snake. The newer image (Image:Fierce Snake Range.jpg) is far more accurate than the previous one (from books), despite the previous one coming from a more reliable source. --Taipan198 09:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, here's one listing of the most venomous snakes. And here's a page for venomous snakes LD50 values – subcutaneous LD50 value (the lower the value the more potent the venom) seems to be the one that the "most venomous" rankings are based upon. --Anshelm '77 22:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Europeans introduced certain species of rat and mouse. There are several species of rat and mouse that are native to Australia, such as the Pseudomys genus of mouse, to name one. Peter1968 06:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Just because this snake most distinguishing feature is its toxicity it doesn't means this data ain't appropiate... Can anyone turn it up?Undead Herle King (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Girth/Diameter

message: I altered the statement that said "The average venom for this fierce snake" because it was potentially misleading.  It isn't mentioned elsewhere in the article that the Taipan is a Fierce Snake, and the lack of capitalization makes it seem as if these snakes themselves are "fierce", i.e., "aggressive".
--Walkeraj 17:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Venom 

message: The article states that "In the case of an intravenous bite, the victim dies in less than two seconds." but later says "there have been no documented human fatalities from the Fierce Snake." So who exactly would the victim be? mice? humans? If no humans have been killed by a bite, how would they know that it takes two seconds to kill you? This seems dubious at best, and needs to clarified and referenced.--168.156.92.92 19:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Although I'm not a snake expert, I know enough to know the intravenous bite = 2 seconds until death claim was wrong, and since two other people here agree, I decided to remove it.  As I understand it, the fastest anyone has died from a venomous snakebite is from a black mamba in about 10 minutes.  I would guess that a fierce snake could subdue someone in about that time, but certainly not in 2 seconds.  As someone astutely pointed out, the blood travel time back to the heart would be more quite a bit more than that, and if I'm not mistaken, death occurs due to the cessation of breathing.  And since there are no recorded human deaths, there's no empirical evidence for how long it takes one to die from a fierce snake bite. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.195.21.235 (talk) 02:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "2 Seconds Until Death" claim removed. 

message: I note that the taipan article refers to this snake as the inland taipan, yet this article uses the capitalized form. Is there a reason to leave it at Inland Taipan, or should it be moved to the non-capitalized spelling? —C.Fred (talk) 00:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Found the answer at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles/Archive 1. Looks like it's the project standard to use all caps to avoid collisions between descriptions and names (e.g. brown snake v. Brown Snake). —C.Fred (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proper name? 

message: It says "Conservation status: NE", but the conservation status article doesn't mention an "NE" classification anywhere. Is it a typo for EN (endangered)? 81.158.2.229 (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: NE = "Not evaluated". Two sources confirm this status.   Per taxobox instructions, I am blanking this field instead of specifying NE. —C.Fred (talk) 23:48, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does "NE" mean in the infobox? 

message: I have been chased by Oxyuranus microlepidotus near Cooper Creek and I can tell you, timid is not a word I would use the describe it. In the daytime they don't show their heads because its too hot but come evening or in the morning keeping a good lookout is a good idea. Euc (talk) 00:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:No original research, the policy is to use published, verifiable information, and not personal experiences. Australia Zoo says they are "very shy and secretive, only willing to bite if threatened", the one that chased you has been misidentified? XLerate (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who said they were timid. 

message: I've started a discussion—at the WikiProject level, since the issue involves multiple articles—about the disclaimer text that keeps getting added about mouse studies not necessarily applying to venom toxicity in humans. It's at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles#Snakes, relative venom strength, and LD50. —C.Fred (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centralized discussion started on mouse study disclaimer 

message: There is an IP user who is using 2 or 3 different IP addresses (User talk:79.177.163.151, User talk:79.180.177.93, and User talk:109.65.137.240) to remove sourced material, violating 3RR, and avoiding discussion of the matter/issue here on the talk page. The fact is, the inland taipan has the most toxic snake venom at 0.025 mg/kg (Australian venom and toxin database) and (Brown, 1973) and 0.01 mg/kg (Ernst & Zug et al. 1996). These figures were obtained by testing the crude venom of the inland taipan on laboratory mice (via subcutaneous injection). According to Brown, 1973 (Brown, JH (1973). Toxicology and Pharmacology of Venoms from Poisonous Snakes. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas. p. 184. ), when crude venom of the inland taipan was tested on primate subjects (Macaque monkeys), the snake did not produce the most toxic venom, like how it did when crude venom was tested on mice. Results of the subcutaneous injections given to adult Macaque monkeys showed that the black mamba (Dendroaspis polylepis) was the most toxic snake tested. The coastal taipan (Oxyuranus scutellatus scutellatus) and the many-banded krait (Bungarus multicinctus) produced second and third most toxic  results, respectively. The inland taipan's  on mice is 0.025 mg/kg, for the black mamba the  on mice is 0.05 mg/kg, for the many-banded krait it's 0.09 mg/kg, for the coastal taipan it's 0.099 mg/kg (Ernst & Zug et al. list coastal taipan at 0.106 mg/kg) - all by SC injection and all on mice. The venom of the inland taipan is deadlier to mice than the other snakes mentioned. Now let's go back to the Macaque monkeys - subcutaneous injections produced  values of 0.47 mg/kg for the inland taipan venom, 1.04 mg/kg for Indian cobra, 1.31 mg/kg for Monocled cobra, 0.28 mg/kg for many-banded krait, 0.24 mg/kg for coastal taipan, and 0.11 mg/kg for the black mamba (Brown, 1973). So it is imperative that we clearly state what the test subject(s) were that gave us the data we have on venom LD50 values for all species, not just the inland taipan. Another issue is the statement that a bite from the inland snake kills in 30-45 minutes. Exactly what study or research paper discusses this "30-45 minutes" death time post-envenomation? Since we don't even have a record of a fatality caused by this species, how would anyone know how long it takes for a human to die after envenomation by the inland taipan? The snake species which kills laboratory mice the quickest is the black mamba. The venom of the black mamba can kill a lab mouse 4.5 minutes post-envenomation, the shortest time among all known venomous snakes Snake venom toxins. The second quickest time for a mouse to die by envenomation was between 7-8 minutes, by the coastal taipan. So, there is a lot more here than just the median lethal dose on mice. For example, venom toxicity and composition can vary tremendously, even among specimens from the same species, factors associated with health of the snake (fangs intact? when was venom apparatus used last? etc), psychological state and physical stature/age/health of person bitten, some venoms are more rapid-acting than others, and on and on and on. --DendroNaja (talk) 09:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I am the editor you're talking about. i have edited most of this article in the past few months (the article had just 8 references when i started). The question of "what snake is the most venomous? brings a lot of heated and subjective preferences, out of reptile fans. You seem to be a Black mamba lover  - i get it. For that very reason, i have added no few than 12 major and authoritative references citing the inland taipan as "the most venomous snake in the world" period.  Even the most authoritative figure Dr. Bryan Fry was asked ""Q: In retrospect to the LD50 charts, what do you personally feel is the hottest snake, in regards to potency, defensiveness, means of injection, etc.? A: It is the inland taipan (Oxyuranus microlepidotus). Not, as is popularised, any of the sea snakes." (reference 19). Wikipedia goes by scientific consensus which has been thoroughly established. Further more every other statement is backed by multiple reliable sources.109.65.137.240 (talk) 10:33, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

text: You are also quoting mixed information : inland taipan LD50 SC is 0.025 mg/kg (in saline) and 0.01mg/kg (in bovine serum albumin). the 0.05mg/kg for the Black mamba cited is in bovine serum albumin. I also doubt Brown cited the inland taipan in his 1973 book, since the first live inland taipans were only captured in September 1972. would like to read that paragraph in his book109.65.137.240 (talk) 11:14, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Murine LD<sub>50</sub> issue and the "30-45 minutes" from bite to death

message: This article needs an overhaul. Too much information on venom, but very little on behavior, habitat, conservation, physiology, etc. A lot of the references are zoos, museums, blogs, newspaper articles, and not much peer-reviewed journalistic work. --DendroNaja (talk) 11:56, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul 

message: The this article is in violating WP:CITEKILL. An IP user using more than one IP address is responsible for this mess. The IPs being used are User talk:79.179.166.212, User talk:79.180.177.93, and User talk:109.65.137.240. --DendroNaja (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is not violating anything.  You are just very unhappy that the Scientific consensus does not go along your personal beliefs. Furthermore - your repeated spiteful edit on December 22 makes you a vandal. 79.179.166.212 (talk) 21:20, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation problems 

message: I've just protected this article due to the ongoing edit warring. Please discuss the matter here instead of continually reverting. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem, Mark, is that the IP user we are dealing with is not well versed about the subject he's editing. In my opinion, we are dealing with nothing more than a younger individual who has a fixed imaginary/fantasy vision of what the Inland taipan should be, rather than focus on what it is by being unbiased and objective. His poor writing and his poor reading comprehension lead me to make use of duplicate detector and he is in violation of WP:CV. Numerous other Wikipedia policies and guidelines have been violated by this IP user over and over again. Warnings didn't stop him. When we try to edit to fix some of these problems he quickly reverts them. He is not willing to comply with anything nor is he willing to work with me (and other editors who have seemingly given up) in improving the article. He is an obsessed/fanatic. I and some of the other editors have degrees on the very subject matter - but he refuses to allow us to edit. In my opinion, he simply needs to be given an indefinite block. --DendroNaja (talk) 02:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at it again, it does seem like consensus is against the IP instead of an even content dispute as I first thought. I'd changed it to semi-protected for one month. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: * Duplicate detector
* Duplicate detector
* Duplicate detector
* Duplicator detector
* Duplicate detector
And that is after only a brief search, anyone else can find more copyright violations? This article is almost entirely plagiarized. --DendroNaja (talk) 02:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major copyright violations made by IP user 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here, here, here, and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Diannaa (talk) 00:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Diannaa I think you should consider taking another look at those reports. There is no actual indication that there was a single copyright violation. The duplicator reports match simple identical word patterns and these reports are flagging things like the snakes' scientific names (such as "inland taipan oxyuranus") and common and partial word phrases (like "land snake in the world"). These reports track common word combinations, and alarm bells should only really go off if those combinations are six words or more, or if the phrases are noticeably unique and non-technical. Copyright is serious, but there's no cited evidence anything was ever actually in violation here. I think contributions have been removed based on battlegrounding accusations with nothing of substance behind them. What do you think? My apologies. I see that the reports were comparing the pages with the updated page. My fault for not noticing that the reports weren't the same ones that you saw. Happy editing....  __ E L A Q U E A T E 22:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi Elaqueate. It's possible to still observe the comparison by plugging the url for an old revision into the duplication detector. For example, This source has sequences of 156 words, 64 words, 56 words, 31 words, 29 words, 23 words, 17 words, 16 words, 11 words, and smaller segments in common with  of the article (72 segments of varying length altogether). This article has 79 matches of varying length from 54 words down to 2 words. The other two sources I did not check as closely, as those first two alone are enough to justify rolling back the article. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's what I ended up doing, after I realized where I could have been incorrect. (I've seen these reports misused over three-word-similarities before and was oversensitive to the possibility they were again. But I'll certainly be more thoughtful about interpreting them myself, in the future.) Thanks for keeping an eye on it! __ E L A Q U E A T E 15:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole article was reverted Carte blanche, and a lot of information there does not violate copyright. I am starting to retrieve the parts that are legit according to policies mentioned above.. LarryTheShark (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: A wrong wiki hyperlink has occurred due to the creation of a new sub-page in the target article.
Before the last sentence in the lead ,(hyper link is in bold): "therefore it is not considered the most deadly snake in the world overall, especially in terms of disposition and human deaths per year.[27] "
Should be hyper linked to this article now : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dangerous_snakes ([List_of_dangerous_snakes|most deadly snake in the world])
It was just moved from the snakebite article (Sankebites#Cause) into this new subpage/article. 
The description in the lead (second line), "is a highly venomous snake" should be "is an extremely venomous snake". It is the most venomous snake in the world, and other very venomous snakes, but still much less venomous than the inland taipan are described as "highly" e.g. black mamba.
examples of WP:RS that describe its venom as "extreme" :
"The Inland Taipan is extremely venomous," http://museumvictoria.com.au/discoverycentre/infosheets/snakes-found-in-victoria/inland-taipan/
"this extremely venomous and dangerous snake"  http://toxicology.ucsd.edu/Snakebite%20Protocols/Oxyura~1.htm
Thank you 79.180.52.85 (talk) 22:13, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Done , though the "extremely" change may be undone. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 04:54, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Two fixes in the article 

message: "Private ownership law
In Australia, owning an inland taipan requires a Class 2, Category 3 [R5] License (the highest possible).[59]"
Except the cited link is for NSW. Every state has their own laws regarding reptiles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.239.140.154 (talk) 12:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction needed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Inland taipan. 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/20131022215756/http://science.org.au/scientists/interviews/f/fry.html to http://science.org.au/scientists/interviews/f/fry.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141017041923/http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1212&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=inland+taipan&start=0 to http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1212&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=inland+taipan&start=0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121015165718/http://www.connectedbypets.com/articles/BGF.html to http://www.connectedbypets.com/articles/BGF.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141017041923/http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1212&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=inland+taipan&start=0 to http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1212&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=inland+taipan&start=0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090929220811/http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112 to http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090929220811/http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112 to http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090929220811/http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112 to http://www.reptilepark.com.au/animals.asp?catID=16&ID=112
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) 02:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I understand that it's not the most common word, by any stretch, but it's far from obscure, and it doesn't seem to be used in any particularly niche manner that would warrant a link to its wiktionary page. I would have just un-linked it myself, but I didn't want that edit to be considered vandalism, and I also thought that there might be some reason the link was added that I missed.Crossark (talk) 22:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is "specimens" wiktionaried? 

message: The Taxonomy section is out of date. There are in fact 3 taipan species - not 2. The Central Ranges Taipan was discovered & described in 2007 & has its own Wiki article. 144.139.103.173 (talk) 08:07, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy out of date 

message: This section needs updating. There have been more recent victims. I am only going to paste the links, as I dont feel confident in doing an article update as I am not an expert on the subject.
Eli Campbell
https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/boy-clings-to-life-after-snake-bite/news-story/7e4ea65cd074e490a3c50e61543f759d
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-03/central-queensland-boy-bitten-by-snake-fights-for-life/7898734
https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/snake-bite-boy-will-need-care-for-the-rest-of-his-life-20161010-gryoju.html
Ryan Cole
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/teen-boy-survives-snake-bit--twice-in-a-year/news-story/024e15aebd1ec17a7d46939c01fcb0d2
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1097938/Teenager-survives-brush-deadly-snake--thanks-quick-thinking-friends.html 2001:8003:E40F:9601:5CA6:A644:7B2D:B738 (talk) 06:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snakebite Victims.