Talk:Elephant shrew

☆ Save On Wikipedia ↗

Untitled

pls note discrepancy/confusion in elephant shrew article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephant_shrew). Do they live in pairs, only associate for mating, or live close by and defend territory? Great article, including writing style. Celebrateoften (talk) 05:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 04:37, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Elephant shrew → Sengi — Elephant Shrew can be confused with two(!) orders: Scandentia and Soricidae. So move to Sengi, because this is the proposed anti-confusion name. --Eu-151 (talk) 13:11, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Oppose - I don't see a great potential for confusion between tree shrews and elephant shrews. It is true that they might be confused with some type of shrew, but set against that is the problem that "elephant shrew" still seems to be the most commonly used term for this animal. In order to support the move, I'd want to see evidence that "sengi" has become the standard term used by the IUCN, mammalogical textbooks, popular encyclopaedias of animals, and so on. Not necessarily the only term used, mind you, but at least the more common one, so that users are more likely to search for that term than for the older one.

At the moment, the IUCN prefers "sengi" for four species, and "elephant shrew" for thirteen, which, to my mind, favours the latter. Animal Diversity Web prefers "elephant shrew" for the group as a whole, as does tolweb (although the latter does list "sengi" as an alternative). MSW3 uses "elephant shrew" consistently, as do most older sources I've seen. On the other hand, google does return more hits for "sengi" than for "elephant shrew", and I don't have a good summary of how the term is used in more recent books. Nonetheless, I do not find the case convincing at this stage. Anaxial (talk) 13:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose, essentially agreeing with Anaxial. I agree that there is little potential for confusion with treeshrews (and perhaps less than with otter shrews, which at least occur on the same continent). While it is unfortunate that macroscelideans—an entirely separate group—have a common name suggesting they are "shrews", it is not Wikipedia's job to change general usage. It seems to me that at the moment "elephant shrew" is still more common. Google Scholar since 2000 lists 678 results for "elephant shrew" and 348 for "sengi". Results since 2008 include 233 for "elephant shrew" and 146 for "sengi". For Google Books since 2000, the ratio is 1540 to 1190; since 2008, 307 to 294. "Elephant shrew" is not overwhelmingly more common and usage does appear to be shifting towards "sengi", but I think it is too early for a move. Ucucha 13:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move - more talk

Let me quote the world's most famous naturalist, David Attenborough on this issue. Quote from Attenborough: "It used to be called an elephant shrew, and now it's called by its African name of Sengi.YouTube video. Thanks, Lester 03:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Are you saying that David Attenborough has officially revoked or banned the use of the term "elephant shrew"?--Mr Fink (talk) 05:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Not even the Queen can "ban" a word from being used. But you won't find much more of an authoritative source than Attenborough announcing on the BBC that the term has now changed.-124.149.160.161 (talk) 00:19, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Well, the facts remain that "Elephant shrew" still remains slightly more common than "Sengi," and the consensus as of last week was to leave "Elephant shrew" at "Elephant shrew." So, until David Attenborough is crowned Queen, I don't think there is much point in making a second move request so soon after the previous one.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I can now give a source, although it is not a real mammalological textbook, it still falls under "popular encycopedias of mammals". "The Encyclopedia of Mammals", edited by (or by?) David W. Macdonald, page 76, 77, 78 talks about sengis only and lists "elephant shrew" as alternative, on p.76 even as former name. It is not your "Mammal species of the World", but a written source using sengi consistently.--Eu-151 (talk) 14:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree that that's a pretty reliable source, and a useful data point. But the existence of one such source does not (to my mind) demonstrate that most such sources use the term. When they do, I think it will be time for a change. Anaxial (talk) 23:11, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

So have they heard, we have taxonomic nomenclature for reasons and one of them is to scientifically distinguish taxa by classification rather than common names. Wikipedia allows for titling articles with the most common name, and elephant shrew is something that I assume most people know while sengis is in fact a newly introduced term by some biologists with an agenda to argue semantics. This is probably why the French Wikipedia prefers to use the scientific names of taxa instead of common names, to avoid the issue of semantics. --KaffirLemon (talk) 04:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

For all we know, sengis might as well be a Bantu word for rat, so what is the purpose of introducing new terms? Do these biologists think laymen are all stupid and taxonomic nomenclature is irrelevant to laymen? Again, looks like they have non-neutral POV when it comes to common names, they are trying to sway us from using terms that might be misleading, as if one would think a starfish can copulate with a swordfish. --KaffirLemon (talk) 15:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
If anything, if we do need to move this page, we should move it to the scientific name, rather than play "duck duck goose" with which politically correct common name is currently in vogue.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:10, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elephant shrew. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

On the side-bar, where you hav the same article in other languages; Spanish, Portuguese and French are missing. Likewise, when i was on the equivalent article in the Spanish, Portuguese, and French editions of Wikipedia, there was no link to this English-Wikipedia article, even tho' English is the de facto global lingua franca and the mostly widely used internet language, and the language with the most Wikipedia articles. I tried to fix this, starting with French Wikipedia article, but i couldn't. How do we fix this?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 09:03, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

This is a good idea — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.180.99.89 (talk) 15:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

New reference for elephant shrew speed?

The linked BBC article giving the claim about elephant shrew speed now seems to be broken. 135.180.99.89 (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC) William

meaning of macroscelid

i'm pinging @MossOnALog because you reverted me earlier, if this is not the appropriate way to communicate, please let me know

I'd like to edit the opening sentence to read: Elephant shrews, also called jumping shrews or sengis, are small insectivorous mammals native to Africa, belonging to the family Macroscelididae (defined by Merriam-Webster as being from Ancient Greek μακρός (makrós) 'long' and σκέλος (skélos) 'leg')[1]
Citation


Source

Merriam-Webster. "Macroscelididae". Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Merriam-Webster. OCLC 1032680871. Retrieved 2026-02-14.

I am attempting to make clear that this is definition does not come from Bonaparte nor Butler, but that a tertiary source does give origins and meaning to the string of characters 'macroscelididae' Ngenthatcould (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Ngenthatcould, I think that this info would be best placed somewhere other than the first sentence (and probably not in the lead) per MOS:LEADSENTENCE and MOS:LEADCLUTTER, since it's not a particularly notable or significant aspect of this organism and this isn't summarizing anything already existing in the body of the article. I think a separate etymology section, as is the case for the Merriam-Webster listing, would be appropriate, especially since it could be adequately discussed there that the etymology info does not come from Bonaparte nor Butler. This would also make the content more in line with MOS:LEADCITE, since the material would be in a separate section with citations rather than in the lead where citations should be spared for summarizing of existing body content.
Also, the nested parentheses should be reformatted per MOS:BRACKET, and the "defined by Merriam-Webster as" should be removed per WP:INTEXT. MossOnALogTalk 16:11, 17 February 2026 (UTC)　

Requested move 30 May 2026

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. I've had a look at the Ngrams and as there are multiple ways to interpret those results, and there are also some other sources playing into this. Considering that, I don't think I can say the evidence is clearly in favour of either side, and because of that I'm inclined to not deny the 5-2 advantage (with one "lean oppose" and one "weak support" included) its claim to a consensus. That said, one editor has pointed out that the target for Eastern rock elephant shrew is Eastern sengi, with no reason given for this. As this seems to have been accidental and as nobody else has commented on the discrepancy I'm going to move Eastern rock elephant shrew to Eastern rock sengi per the consensus to change "elephant shrew" to "sengi" and call it a no consensus on whether it should be at Eastern rock sengi or at Eastern sengi instead. (closed by non-admin page mover) ⹃Maltazarian ᚾparley ∨ {\displaystyle \lor } {\displaystyle \lor }investigateᛅ 04:20, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

– The article titles for the Rhynchocyon species already use "sengi," which is inconsistent. Considering which title to standardize on, since both MDD and IUCN, which can be used as reliable sources, preferentially use "sengi," it seems more appropriate to standardize on "sengi." https://www.iucnredlist.org/search?taxonomies=101549&searchType=species https://www.mammaldiversity.org/taxon/1000445/ コロネン (talk) 06:32, 30 May 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 09:40, 6 June 2026 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE 16:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

  • Oppose Neutral, per this n-gram which shows "Sengi" as a common name for the elephant shrew, between "sengi" and "shrew", shrew is the common name for these animals, per n-grams. The n-grams for elephant shrew, in particular, trend heavily towards 'shrew' as the common name. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:35, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Randy Kryn Shrews and elephant shrews are different. Most of the results you'll get when you search for "shrew" are likely to be about the true shrews of Laurasiatheria, not the elephant shrews of Afrotheria (sengis). コロネン (talk) 01:42, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    There was a requested movement around 2010, but at the time it was considered not widespread because it wasn't widely adopted by the IUCN or ASM. Currently, all pages in the Red List and Mammal Diversity Database are standardized with Sengi, so I believe the situation has changed. コロネン (talk) 01:45, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    Thanks for the ping. The n-grams, linked above, indicate overwhelming use of "elephant shrew" as the common name. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:47, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Randy Kryn I've seen the n-gram, but I don't think it makes sense to directly "shrew" and "sengi".
    The word "shrew," without the "elephant" prefix, probably more often refers to a true shrew rather than a sengi (elephant shrew). コロネン (talk) 01:51, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    Have changed to neutral because of this n-gram, you make a good point, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2026 (UTC)
    @Randy Kryn Thank you for your understanding. コロネン (talk) 07:46, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Lean oppose. Although I am sympathetic to the motivation for renaming these animals so that they are not misunderstood to be shrews (as apparently just happened above), I don't think "sengi" is recognizable. For example, ngrams can't find any result for "a sengi" or "the sengi". Our NPOV policy is about not picking sides and seeking to advance one or the other. Of course, IUCN and MDD are free to do that. For consistency, if this RM fails, we should probably move the Rhynchocyon species back. Srnec (talk) 11:28, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
    @Srnec I'm not very familiar with n-grams, so I'd appreciate it if you could explain them to me.
    Why is it that searching for "sengi" and "elephant shrew" yields similar results, but searching for "a sengi" or "the sengi" yields no results at all? コロネン (talk) 07:49, 3 June 2026 (UTC)
    I think there must be lots of false positives for "sengi" and "sengis", but who knows. Ngrams just look at published English books down to 2022. Srnec (talk) 13:46, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Support per nom, seems to be NATURAL.--Ortizesp (talk) 13:36, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
    There's no ambiguity issue. "Elephant shrew" is unambiguous. Srnec (talk) 20:46, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Support. I just came to WP because of reading a report of Hertfordshire Zoo recently having a second litter of "Sengi" and wanted to know more. The article notes that they aren't shrews so we should not use the incorrect term. --~2026-34482-64 (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
Note: WikiProject Mammals has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 16:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Weak support. It seems like the term "sengi" has been established as the preferred term, but I don't support moving Eastern rock elephant shrew → Eastern sengi. It should be "Eastern rock Sengi". So I support 15 of the moves and oppose 1.
Naturedata (talk) 19:10, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Support. It seems to be the preferred term these days, as for example, at the Animal Diversity Database and the IUCN red list which are both widely used here. It may not be universal to the point of being a slam dunk, but it is common in modern listings. Anaxial (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Comment Oppose. The ngrams seem to support elephant shrew, especially if allowing for capitalisation and hyphenation (see this ngram). Elephant shrew was used more in nearly all years since 1850, except a period from 2015 to 2019 (see recent ngram). The fall-off after 2020 is strange and I wonder if this might be artefactual; don't ask me how, it just seems suspicious. If real that would be a reason to oppose the move and wait for newer data on the trends.
The IUCN and MDD use Sengi and there is a clear movement to adopt Sengi to be more phylogenetic, but the question is what is the real common name used by most people? I think according to WP:COMMONNAME both elephant shrew and sengi are used approximately equally so we should adopt the unambiguous scientific name. The alternative is to make the decision to follow one of the scientific bodies, which is what is done by the bird project (following IOC and moving to AviList). The argument for a move to Sengi would be for conistency with the IUCN and/or MDD rather than WP:COMMONNAME.  —  Jts1882 | talk  07:26, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
Changing to oppose. The ngrams don't support sengi as the most common name. It was for only a few years and even then it wasn't clearly the most common name (neither was elephant shrew). There is a case to open a discussion on using the IUCN or MDD as a source for English vernacular names. This would not be strictly in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME, but other projects take this approach.  —  Jts1882 | talk  09:03, 17 June 2026 (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.

Correction of the Repuested Move

The correct name for the article is Eastern Rock Sengi. I apologize for the confusion caused by my oversight in omitting "Rock." コロネン (talk) 04:30, 22 June 2026 (UTC)