Talk:Opossum

Mammals: Monotremes and Marsupials Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects 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.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials (assessed as Low-importance).

Archives

1

This page has archives. Sections older than 150 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Date of reference is wrong

The following text:

The opossum was described as early as 1565 in the published letter entitled "Carigueya, Seu Marsupiale Americanum Masculum. Or, The Anatomy of a Male Opossum: In a Letter to Dr Edward Tyson, from Mr William Cowper, Chirurgeon, and Fellow of the Royal Society, London. To Which are Premised Some Further Observations on the Opossum; And a New Division of Terrestrial Brute Animals, Particularly of Those That Have Their Feet Formed Like Hands. Where an Account is Given of Some Animals Not Yet Described", by Edward Tyson, M. D. Fellow of the College of Physicians and of the Royal Society. The letter suggests even earlier descriptions.[6]

is wrong, or at least irretrievably confused. The date of the letter is asserted to be 1565, but the Royal Society was established in 1666, more than a century later. This text was added by an anon in march 2007. I just added the links to the society and to Cowper, but then noticed that the dates don't match. Of the three possible "William Cowper"s that are FRS, the only surgeon, William Cowper (anatomist), was born in 1666 and died on 1709, and was a contemporary of Dr Edward Tyson. Furthermore, there was almost not english presence in Virginia before 1607. Can someone with access to JSTOR please check the source? - Arch dude (talk

Aha! The anon contributor was merely confused, not a vandal. The letter was published in 1698, but is was published on Page 1565: Philosophical Transactions (1683-1775), Volume 24, pp. 1565-1575

see [1] I will repair the article. -Arch dude

possums

I can't speak factually other than my personal experiences and the comments from my vets. Hubby says we have the Holts Summit City Zoo because we have dogs, cats, horses, deer, possums, coons, kois, fish of all kinds, cardinals, eagles, hawks, and a green wing macaw which he hates.

Granted most of these are wild animals - hence the 'zoo', lol!

Now, back to topic. We have coons and possums who think they are pets. Come on the deck to get in the trash cans, but will tease the dogs through the french doors in the early am. If it was a cartoon, they would have their thumbs in the ears going 'nah, nah, nah!'.

The possums are not welcome. Because of the horses - their feces can be fatal to a horse. However, like I said, ours think they are pets. I let the cat out one night and went to call it back. Didn't turn the deck light on but saw the cat on the steps but she didn't come. Went out in the dark and sat on step and petted the cat. As I ran my hand down her tail, I said 'what happened to your tail'? Ok, I'm a ditz - I talk to animals, computers, myself - ok, don't put me away yet!

At that point he turned to look at me and we both took off running - opposite directions - it was the possum!

I do take exception to the not aggressive statement. They haven't been to me, but I have seen them tear other animals, including dogs, to pieces.

If I can attach a pic I will. Here goes.

Ok, inserting pics didn't work. Anyone have any suggestions on how to insert pics? THanks.

File:Possums.jpg
coons

coons

No longer recognized species

Under the classification section there are 16 different species that are no longer recognized as valid, and 14 of those have their own separate pages. Just wondering what we should do about them? Most of them have been reclassified as synonyms of other species that are valid, and idk what to do about their pages. For now I marked the invalid ones and listed the species they are synonyms for, but it would be better to clean it up. DirtWhiskey (talk) 07:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably they should be merged with the article the species are now synonymous with. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we usually wait until the IUCN and MDD are in agreement before making taxonomic changes. I haven't checked the IUCN on these changes yet, though I spot checked the MDD and those seem right. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Principles of Biology 2

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2024 and 3 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wildfern.27 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Wildfern.27 (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is “Siebert”?

In the etymology section, it states:

 Siebert reconstructs the word phonemically as /a·passem/.

Who is “Siebert” here? The name doesn’t seem to be referenced before this sentence.

The citation for the sentence is “Crawford, James Mack; Crawford, James D. (1975). Studies in Southeastern Indian Languages. University of Georgia Press. ISBN 978-0-8203-0334-5.” However, the editor there is “Crawford”, not “Siebert.” It’s possible that “Siebert” is the author of the relevant passage, but the name doesn’t appear in the small linked excerpt on Google Books. I don’t have the cited book, and there’s no ebook available, so I can’t check it for more detail.

Does anybody have a good justification for the name “Siebwet”, or a better phrasing for that sentence without the name? Magicmat (talk) 11:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]