This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology
This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction
Latest comment: 12 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
I only find 4 references to the term "Koala lemur" in google scholar and 10 references to "Koala lemurs". On the other hand Megaladapidae brings back 153 and "Megaladapis" 358. It seems that the common name is less common then the scientific name. and should possibly be moved back to the genus name.--Kevmin (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Sorry I missed your comment earlier. Most of the major secondary sources on lemurs mention this species (as well as the sloth lemurs, monkey lemurs, etc.) by common names. The same goes for the taxonomic authorities for lemurs. Generally, WP:PRIMATES prefers common names to scientific names when available. Additionally, the academic literature tends to prefer scientific names to common names, so I'm not sure if what you're referring to is a fair comparison. However, if you still prefer to move it back, we could discuss it briefly at WT:PRIMATES. – VisionHolder « talk »05:24, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
The current ratio at Google Books, which of course has both popular and scientific titles, is 33 for "koala lemur", 17 for "koala lemurs", and ca. 10,500 for "megaladapis". I think it is fair to conclude that the scientific name is by far the most commonly used one for this genus. Iblardi (talk) 21:14, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
And "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources".[1] "koala lemur" obviously doesn't fit these criteria. "giant lemur" seems somewhat more common, getting 500+ hits on GB, but it is still far less frequent than "megaladapis". Hence I propose to rename the article Megaladapis. Iblardi (talk) 06:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)Reply
File:F John Series 2 Megaladapis card 10.jpg Nominated for Deletion
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
