Talk:Crested gecko

message: Just a few things which strike me first up:
*Can we change the name to all caps, so as to be in line with the other amphibian and reptile features?
*Which English does this article use (looks like US, but I would like to know for sure before I start contributing)?
Thanks --liquidGhoul 03:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did the move, I think I fixed all the issues with it (and tweaked a couple lines to make them clearer). The 'todo' had me stumped for a second until I realized there was a refresh button on the side. The article is US English, but I have no problem one way or the other, as long as it is consistent throughout, if you (or someone else) prefers to change it. I think British would probably be more logical, with New Caledonia being named after Scotland and all... but I don't think it is really that big of a deal. -Dawson 16:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mind it being in US english, I think it should stay what it originally was. However, you will probably need to have a look over my edits, 'cause it is second nature for me to spell in Australian english. Thanks --liquidGhoul 23:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We still need an "Ecology and behaviour" section, but it needs more information. If you think something needs to be moved, then you are probably right. If I disagree with any changes, I will bring it up here. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 09:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have one of these lizards and it recently lost it's tail (it just finished healing), i could take a picture the reason of importance being Cresteds don't grow their tails back. Please leave a note on my talk page if you believe this would be a good contribution? MikelZap (talk) 22:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Few things 

message: I have run out of sources to use for this article (I have to admit, I completely forgot about it for a while). Are there any good online resources we can use for this article. I have no books at my disposal for New Caledonian reptiles. :) --liquidGhoul 11:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, there are scant few print sources that discuss much of the species' natural history, beyond "It is a gecko, it is from New Caledonia, except the one I already consulted and added, which has less than a page of information - but at least it did discuss the range enough for the map. I think further information will have to be gleaned from breeder/enthusiast websites, but we'll have to steer clear of opinion. For instance, I haven't found any solid information on the effects of egg incubation temperature on gender determination yet. -Dawson 16:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A google scholar search [] might help. I don't have time to read all the referenced papers, but something ought to be there worth noting. --Leperflesh 01:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources?

message: The conservation status for this species is currently 'unknown'. CITES lists it as unknown - although its approximate range is known, there is no data on the species' health, frequency with its range, or threat to habitat on which to base a status. I can find no sources online from which to derive a conservation status. --Leperflesh 22:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's undergoing an assessment by IUCN as well as CITES.  14 years ago they were thought to be extinct...now they seem to be everywhere!  Maybe some users from New Caledonia or New Zealand can shed some light?--Mike Searson 00:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Conservation status

message: Theres was alot of links some had mutipul ones going to the same site some had the exact same info and some were just for business purposes . Also want to add http://geckofile.top-site-list.com as most of the links are alreay there ,there wasnt a link for a forum and it seems like a very helpful site . If there are not any objections for a week or two I will do this .  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pagosapunk (talk • contribs) 22:13, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaned links 

message: Is the "New Caledonian" part of New Caledonian Crested Gecko necessary/appropriate?  Not that I'm an expert, but it seems to me that in common usage it's always simply Crested Gecko.  This Wiki article is the only thing I can find referring to the gecko this way.  Furthermore, it implies it's a subspecies that requires differentiation from other breeds, when that doesn't appear to be the case.   Mbinebri  talk ← 15:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename? 

message: I've seen a few revisions changing the taxonomy info on this page from R. ciliatus to Correlophus ciliatus after the Bauer et. al 2012 paper recommending a reorganization of Rhacodactylus (which they found was not monophyletic).  The revisions were reverted with the note that Wikipedia is conservative when it comes to changes in taxonomy.  This makes sense, but at the moment both the Rhacodactylus and the Diplodactylinae pages reflect the reorganization, leaving things out of sync.  (Not to mention the fact that some pages reflect a move of these genera to Diplodactylidae, while some still have them in Gekkonidae.)  Is there an effort underway to make a global decision and regain consistency?--Chanther 15:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy Revision (Rhacodactylus / Correlophus) 

message: Someone came along and changed all the names to "Dwarf Monitor" and other such stupidity (like making the scientific name "Dwarfus monitorus"; can it be restored to a point before the moron came in?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.36.58.247 (talk) 14:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The page got trolled... 

message: My partner and I have been keeping this particular species for 15 years now and are working on a project to advance the knowledge base on this species as we have identified many misconceptions due to much of our understanding of this species.  Much of those issues, as I believe Connorlong09 has pointed out, come from the hobbyist and pet industries.  Much of work is based in changing some of the keeping practices and discussion of this species and since Wikipedia is such an authoritative source for the layperson, I thought this was a good place to start.  More specifically, addressing antiquated practices that are continued today on the basis of no real scientific research and essentially just "what has always worked".  I'll admit while being an avid user of wikipedia I am new to the editing process.  I made a number of edits that got flagged for self promotion and so I wanted to take a moment to explain my intent and address the main topic of this section: colloquialisms being used when discussing certain aspects of this species.  Little is understood about crested gecko genetics as there have been very few, if any, genetic studies on the animal but one thing I think that is abundantly clear is the describing the poly morphism of the species.  Often in the pet trade certain phenotypical traits are referred to as "morphs".  This is incorrect because within herpetoculture the term “morph” refers to any animal that exhibits an external appearance different than the same animal would have in nature. This particular article makes the statement: "The crested gecko has many naturally occurring color groups, including grey, brown, red, orange, and yellow of various shades. They have three color morphs in the wild, which include pattern-less, white-fringed, and tiger." I would argue that this is incorrect.  For one, the usage of the term morph is incorrect because these pattern (not color) traits are exhibited in the wild population, just as in the same vein dalmatian, harlequin, and pinstripe (all traits described in this species) have been observed in the wild population, particularly in the Exo-Terra New Caledonia expedition (which is cited in this article).  Morph, when it is correctly used in herpetoculture, refers to genetic mutations that result out of selective breeding that exist outside the wild population, see the various morphs in leopard geckos and ball pythons that do not exist in the wild.  There has been only one morph (referred to as lilly white) developed for this species.  Perhaps some people will view my argument as pedantic but my reasoning is that the perpetuation of such misunderstanding has resulted in what continues to be an issue (among many) within the herp community and as I said previously, wikipedia is viewed as an authoritative source for the layperson.
Essentially, my original entry:
They exhibit various phenotypes amongst the wild population, such as pattern-less, dalmatian, and tiger. These phenotypical traits have been incorrectly described as "morphs" within the pet keeping community but since these traits exist in the wild population this terminology is incorrect.  In fact, only one true morph has been developed within the breeding community, which has been dubbed Lilly White. 
Is correct.  
Yes, I linked to an article I wrote on the topic but it is not intended as self-promotion and the article cites sources for this information (particularly work being done by Matt Parks, Tom Favazza, Allen Repashy, and Anthony Vasquez who are all well known authoritative sources) and is a collection of that information as a single article rather than citing the many other sources.  
I certainly don't want to engage in a link-war or whatever it is wikipedia editors refer to it as, so I was hoping to discuss the topic further, here.  I won't make any further edits until perhaps we can come to some consensus on the matter. Geckobreeder (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commonly incorrect terminology and misunderstandings particularly with this species 

message: The page lists Crested Geckos to be 10-24 inches with 10-13 inches of tail - I have never seen or heard of a crested gecko this big. The source cited is a book from 2003 by Robbie Hamper. I've found another article by the same author from 2021, describing the species as 8-10 inches in total length and 32 to 45 grams in total mass.
https://reptilesmagazine.com/keeping-and-breeding-crested-geckos/#more
This source says total length of about 8 inches, snout to vent length 4 to 4.7 inches, and 35 to 60 grams total mass.
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1tIPBgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&ots=FTpmXlLKtW&sig=h0HQVQyei_IJtRRRIhzrOGSHZz4#v=onepage&q&f=false
This source agrees that total length of about 8 inches, snout to vent length 4 to 4.5 inches, total mass of 35 grams.
https://reptilesmagazine.com/crested-gecko-care-sheet/ 170.85.6.205 (talk) 17:59, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Physical Description - Size Inaccuracies