Talk:Python brongersmai

	Python brongersmai is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 21 July 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Blood python. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Requested move 21 July 2022

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 12:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Python brongersmai → Blood python – This species has a well accepted and unambiguous common name, so I suggest that this article should use that title. The target name has apparently always led to this topic and in fact was the name of the article about this snake before 2007. There was a page move of 2007 when someone moved it away from that name with an edit summary saying "Scientific names should be used for page names on biological organisms whenever possible to avoid confusion." That is not Wikipedia's current naming convention, which prefers common names. I've had a little trouble tracing the page history – I wonder if there was a WP:CUTPASTE move. Some of the edit history is now at Python curtus brongersmai, where the 2007 article was moved and then later converted to a redirect in 2014. This species was previously considered a subspecies of Python curtus, but was elevated to species status. In fact the binomial name situation is a bit confusing, since older sources would call this snake P. curtus instead of P. brongersmai. The Reptile Database does not show "blood python" as a common name for P. curtus; it only shows that name for P. brongersmai. An NGram chart is here. The suggested term is also more popular than "Python brongersmai" in Google Scholar and vastly more popular in a Google Advanced Search for exact phrases. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 04:38, 21 July 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 13:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – robertsky (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article about the related Borneo python also uses its vernacular name as the title, and "Blood python" is not a common name used for the Borneo python, according to The Reptile Database. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:32, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per COMMONNAME.--Ortizesp (talk) 01:58, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The name used by IUCN RL assessors is Brongersma's short-tailed python. I support this name as page title, but NOT the proposed blood python. – BhagyaMani (talk) 05:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Brongersma's short-tailed python" is hardly ever used. Google Scholar found only 3 instances of that string! (And 2 duplicates.) IUCN doesn't seem to provide a list of common names. The Reptile Database and ITIS do not even mention that name in their lists. All of the common names listed by The Reptile Database and ITIS for this species include "blood python", Google Advanced Search and Google Scholar find "Blood python" at least 10 times more prevalent than "Brongersma's short-tailed python". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:05, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination and discussion "defense". N-grams show the proposed name is the better known in English of these two choices. Although named in the vicinity of a well-known person in the field, the present name sounds like a soup. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:38, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: There are so many common names probably best to keep the binomial. YorkshireExpat (talk) 18:17, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Comment: Randy Kryn's Ngram link was using a case-sensitive search. The Ngram link in my original nomination rationale was much better, as it was case-insensitive, and it shows a much more conclusive result. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]