Talk:Trimeresurus albolabris

message: There seems to be something wrong with the Distribution section. It repeats itself - or have i missed something? Merbabu 15:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It does repeat, but my guess would be that it is demonstrating how different source references can often give slightly different information. -Dawson 15:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely! The distributions for some species are complex and confusing. In this case I included information from several sources (see the reference links) just to show how opinions differ. Now the readers can make up their own minds about who to believe. --Jwinius 16:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Distribution info

message: This animal has been reclassified to Cryptelytrops albolobris, as of Malhorta and Thorpe's study in 2004. 
I do not know how to change the title of the page. 
Etc  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkdan999 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, but the decision was made in 2006 to follow the ITIS taxonomy for all of these articles. ITIS does not recognize Cryptelytrops, although it probably will in due time. Patience! --Jwinius (talk) 12:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Classification

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus on subject's WP:COMMONNAME. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:46, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Trimeresurus albolabris →  – Unambiguous and well accepted common name (with the Cryptelytrops proposal as an additional supporting factor). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:05, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Those seem like rather minor variations of the same name. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:30, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding "pit viper" versus "pitviper", that is clearly a minor matter of styling, and Wikipedia tends to include the space (in titles). We have an article at "Pit viper" and we also have some other (dab) pages that have titles that include "pit viper" (Green pit viper, Hump-nosed pit viper, Mongolian pit viper), although we seem to have no other articles that use that. We do not have any articles or dab pages that have "pitviper" in their titles. "Pit viper" also seems much more common than "pitviper" in general outside of Wikipedia Google advanced search and Google ngram viewer both find "pit viper" much more common than "pitviper". Also, currently the body of the article primarily uses "pit viper" rather than "tree viper", and Google advanced search gets about twice as many hits for "White-lipped pit viper" than for "White-lipped tree viper". However, I notice that both Google advanced search and Google ngram viewer actually show more results for "Trimeresurus albolabris"! —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 6 September 2021 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Trimeresurus albolabris, White-lipped pit viper (female) - Kaeng Krachan National Park (27493423545).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 30, 2022. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2022-10-30. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.9% of all FPs 17:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD