Talk:European tree frog

Untitled
The initial version of this article was a translation of the German and Dutch articles. Mgm|(talk) 20:52, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)


 * The German article has been extended in the last time. Perhaps it's worth while visiting it again! Remark: The first author was Linnaeus, 1758, not Laurenti. -- Fice, June 5, 2005

Merger

 * Do it !, but take Hyla arborea onto a separate page as European Tree Frog--GRM 21:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose The European Tree Frog is a species group which contains four species, Hyla is a large genus containing over 30 species, and the move would be inappropriate. Especially considering there are Hyla in the Americas, Africa and Asia. --liquidGhoul 22:10, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, OK! Sorry, showing a little ignorance there... :-) Still prefer H. arborea to have its own page...--GRM 22:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It did originally, but there was a change in taxonomy, and the species was split. The Hyla arborea you know (if you are from Europe) could now be one of the other species! If you want to create a seperate article, you are welcome to, but there isn't a lot of information available which specificly applies to Hyla arborea. It is unknown whether the old research on Hyla arborea was actually on a different species. If you include it all under a species complex (as is done here), all the old research still applies. Thanks. --liquidGhoul 23:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Just to give you some examples, if you want to go ahead with it. Corroboree frog is a species complex (split quite a while ago) which has remained a single article. Litoria lesueurii was split in 2004, and has seperate articles (Litoria wilcoxi and Litoria junguy when someone creates it). --liquidGhoul 23:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am from and in Europe. Can you popint me to a source for the recent split? Many thanks--GRM 16:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Hehe, sorry, I got that a little wrong, must have been thinking of a different species. Seems someone has decided that this article is for all the tree frogs which are on mainland Europe. I agree that this should be its own article, and so should the rest of the species listed. It was originally a sole article for Hyla arborea but someone got confused, it should be moved to European Tree Frog, and concentrate on Hyla arborea. Thanks for pointing this out. --liquidGhoul 00:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I made some basic changes to bring it closer to what it should be about, although, it is still far from perfect. E_rulez 18:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Diet.
Can someone please including a section that states the diet of this animal?

Valserian (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Common tree frog redirect
Common tree frog currently redirects to this article. Shouldn't the redirect point to Common Tree Frog (Polypedates leucomystax) instead? Also raised the question on talk:Common Tree Frog. MKFI (talk) 17:49, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have changed the redirect and added hatnote to Common Tree Frog article. MKFI (talk) 15:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

"Only Hylidae idiginous to Europe" - what about Italian Treefrog?
Article claims H. Arborea is the only Hylidae idiginous to Europe. What about the Italian Treefrog (H. intermedia)? Wardog (talk) 13:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

European tree frog status

 * I think that this entry is almost complete. There is an in depth description of the species and there are also other sections which describe its distribution, habitat, behavior, and reproduction. The section for behavior though is pretty lacking I think. This section does not have that much information. There are only 4 bullet points that describe only a few of the different behaviors that the European tree frog has. I think that the other sections of the entry do have good descriptions of the lifestyle of the frog itself though. For example, the reproduction section does have a good description of the frog’s reproductive cycle. But I think that there could be more that should be added to behaviors. Additionally, I think that there should be an included diet section since the article talks about wanting to add in a diet section which could be important to understanding the behavior of the animal. I think that I agree with the importance ranking because most of the page is completed but there are still some missing areas that must be completed such as the Behavior and also needing a diet section in the article. --Qinan123 (talk) 01:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)