Talk:Oryctes rhinoceros

If someone is able to add the outcome of the UN research ... would help the article.Supcmd (talk) 11:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 28 February 2024

 * 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: moved to Oryctes rhinoceros. This discussion, though initially divided, converged to a consensus after the scientific name was identified as more common than any particular vernacular name. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Asiatic rhinoceros beetle → Coconut rhinoceros beetle – The name 'coconut rhinoceros beetle' is the preferred common name. Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Insects has been notified of this discussion. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose: no evidence has been presented, and the proposer has heavily edited the article to preempt this move. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The name 'coconut rhinoceros beetle' is used in almost all recent publications and websites, e.g. see
 * https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.37974
 * https://doi.org/10.3390%2Finsects13050487
 * https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fepp.12930
 * https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.cropro.2023.106400
 * https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jip.2017.07.006
 * Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 18:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sean Marshall and Trevor Jackson are credited as authors of four of those publications, and Sulav Paudel is an author of three. Plantdrew (talk) 19:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak support: doing a neutral Google search (on the scientific name alone) gives, among the top 25 unique hits, one entry (Wikipedia) for "Asiatic", one for "Asian", 4 with no common name evident, and 19 with "coconut" or "coconut palm". It's a crude metric, admittedly, but it does suggest that the preponderance of sources do prefer the latter over the former, and that's enough to justify a title change. I agree that the aggressive pre-vote edits were inappropriate, but it doesn't weaken the overall case for supporting the move. Dyanega (talk) 19:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks, my Google search gives me 9010 for "Asiatic rhinoceros beetle" but 290000 results for "coconut rhinoceros beetle" Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 19:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Move to Oryctes rhinoceros. While "coconut rhinoceros beetle" is more commonly used than "Asiatic rhinoceros beetle", the scientific name appears to be more commonly used than any vernacular name. Scientific name leads in Ngrams, and I get 1410 Google scholar results for "coconut rhinoceros beetle" and 7,180 for "Oryctes rhinoceros". Plantdrew (talk) 22:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would strongly support this, and I would also move European rhinoceros beetle to Oryctes nasicornis. After all, the whole idea of scientific (Latin) names is to have a uniform, internationally accepted, standard naming system. Bernhard Zelazny (talk) 08:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I would also support a move to Oryctes rhinoceros - maybe this proposed move should be closed and a new one started, accordingly. I would actually be a bit more strongly in favor regarding the change to the European rhinoceros beetle article title, because that species has a massive list of subspecies and could very easily be subjected to a "splitting" into multiple species - which would all have the same common name (for example, "red palm weevil" also refers to more than one species, and the articles use scientific names to keep them straight). Dyanega (talk) 17:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)