Talk:Lithobates heckscheri

Move to Lithobates heckscheri?
"River frog" can refer to a large number of mostly distantly related frog species (but with some additional qualifiers, such as "Van Dijk's river frog"). It is also the common name for two genera, Amietia and Thoropa. Thus, according to the WP:NCFAUNA the scientific name should be used, or at least, a hatnote should be added. I suggest moving the page. Micromesistius (talk) 07:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * In general I would agree with you that this frog should be listed under its scientific name. In this instance that would be problematic as there is controversy as to whether it should be classified as Rana heckscheri or Lithobates heckscheri - see the Taxonomy section. I merely expanded an article called "River frog" and have no strong views as to what the page should be called. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I would not worry too much about the controversy. Wikipedia is pretty consistent in using Lithobates already, in keeping with the Amphibian Species of the World being the "official" source of taxonomy for this project, as well as what IUCN has adopted. Micromesistius (talk) 07:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lithobates heckscheri. 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/20080528131608/http://www.cnah.org/pdf_files/215.pdf to http://www.cnah.org/pdf_files/215.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) 06:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)