Talk:Lizard/Archive 1

Archive 1

word link

you should add there preadators in the artical you do not have that in any of that info.in any of your animals if you dont do this imediatly i will sue you good day from:dr.shubalubadingdong presedent of kanagroo island in austalia good day —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.215.23 (talk) 20:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The term "lacertilian" does not link to this page ("lacertilia" does, however). Could some bright wiki-savvy person please arrange that it does? thank you. 165.91.65.191 (talk) 14:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)RKH

Evolutionary history?

This article is sadly incomplete without this section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.214.252.111 (talk) 01:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Snakes

I think this article should include the current theory that snakes are derived from lizards, based on DNA data. This is touched upon in the venomous lizards section, but needs to be more explicit. This paper should be cited. Snakes are also relevant in the trend towards reduced leg size and leglessness seen in some lizard groups, as they can then be seen as another group of legless lizards. --Graminophile (talk) 12:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Misc. comments

is it true that lizard tails, if grabbed WILL NOT BREAK OFF? I have always heard this - but am not sure if true.... 69.3.16.194 23:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey I heard and seen the exact opposite of it! I was about to ask if it was true that lizard's tail is detachable and that it can voluntarily detach it to distract a prey! I have seen many tailless lizards and lizards with disproportionate tails. Oh i forgot to say I am talking of wall lizards, lizards you can find on walls. But i think this wall lizard is different. Elncid (talk) 09:26, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have a source for the Harry Greene quote: "These papers threaten to radically ... venom evolution"? I googled for it and only found that phrase in instances of the text of this article. Harry Greene is in fact a Cornell herpetologist, but it would be nice to have a source for the quote. -- bethenco 21:02, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

the page http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/~uetz/families/taxa.html#Sau has them catalogued differently. which is right? SpookyMulder 13:54, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This bit: A brief courtship and mating season occurs between mid-May and early-June. Twenty days after breeding, the female will lay from 2-21 creamy-white leathery eggs in a burrow beneath a large rock. The young hatch 2-3 months later, averaging 3-4 inches in length seems awfully specific to refer to ALL lizards. --DM, 15 Sep 2005

Yeh, mating season sure can't be global! --moxon 10:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems unlikely those sentences are true of all lizards, so I removed them. -- bethenco 21:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Some external links are broken. Is it better to link to http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Anthony+Herrel%27s+lizard+page instead of the actual link(which is broken.) Yukon guy 19:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Number of fingers and toes?

How many fingers and toes do lizards have (excluding, of course, legless lizards)? I've looked at some pictures, and all the ones I could see clearly seemed to have five fingers on each hand. I have not been able to count the toes. Can someone help? And how much variation is there on this point? SpectrumDT 18:40, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

There is a lot of variation on this point, as some lizards are "on their way" towards becoming legless. Although those with fully formed legs and feet have five. --liquidGhoul 00:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Which one is this?

?

I've just obtained and uploaded a CC image of a lizard. Can somebody identify the exact type this lizard so that a descriptive caption could be used and put on the appropriate page? Thanks. --Oblivious 09:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Genus Agama? Is it a juvenile? Do we know where it's from? - Samsara (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Its from the Maldives and they never grow bigger than this. --Oblivious 21:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Calotes versicolor. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Legless Lizards

Found one in the backyard in our home on the Gold Coast, Australia. Does anyone know how to keep these alive in captivity? Mainly what foods they eat, how to set up habitat, etc.

Nearly legless

What are those lizards called, who have long fat bodies and stubby legs, and basically slither through sand?

. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.162.202.119 (talk) 12:19, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe you are referring to the Sandfish, Scincus scincus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark.scherz (talk • contribs) 11:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Extinct Species?

The extinct species Mosasauridae is included in the species categories -- but aren't there many types of dinosaur-era lizards that should also be included (if that one is)?

Most of those "dinosaur era lizards" are not actually true lizards, they're reptiles of other orders not related to lizards. Mosasaurs, on the other hand, actually were true marine lizards.Dinoguy2 01:33, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Lizard species

hi! does anyone know how many different speicies of lizards there are?----Fonkety ponk 17:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know the answer but maybe someone can find out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.33.48 (talk) 22:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Lizard eggs

Hi! Does anyone know how many eggs lizards lay at once?--Fonkety ponk 18:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

The number of eggs a lizard lays at once varies from species to species.

Lizard Lounge.com

Before this turns into an edit war, just want to point out the Wiki guideline on conflict of interest. I'd just be careful about being too insistant on adding links to content you created yourself... Dinoguy2 02:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Anonymous as well. Unwilling to sign on with an account or discuss the matter, there isn't much reason to think he's got a case. Jim.henderson 06:56, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Growth

Isn't it true that lizards (and other reptiles) will continue growing all their lives, as opposed to mammals who will only grow to a certain extent? I know I read this somewhere (and it wasn't Eragon) Scorpionman 20:47, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk page guidelines say talk pages should be used for improvements to the page, not as a forum. I assume you want this information added to the page? WLU 05:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

what can I do to keep them out of my house. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.60.178.4 (talk) 01:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

American Alligator Lizard

We found an american alligator lizard and are not sure anything about it. What temperatures does it like? What does it like to eat? Does it like grass or branches?

Does anyone know anything about these? I can only find alligators on the web.

24.113.219.115 16:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Venomous Lizards Section

I'm finding this section confusing, and I was wondering if anyone could clarify it. My first problem is with the sentence, "According to this study, nine toxins previously thought to only occur in snakes have been discovered out of several thousand." Several thousand what? Secondly I don't get the sentence, "The scientists behind these findings are calling for a re-evaluation of the classification system for lizard species to form a venom clade and if successful may result in changes to the beliefs regarding the evolution of lizards, snakes, and venom." The venom clade link is a redirect to Toxicofera, and there is only one Toxicofera. How could the venomous lizards form another one? Is a vemon clade different from Toxicofera, or should it say "join Toxicofera" istead of "form a venom clade"? Felliax08 00:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

It seems that the woriter missed the komodo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_Dragon the in 2005 was found to be produce a venom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Komodo_Dragon#Venom_and_bacteria

Lizards at Iguazu Falls

Image:Lizards at Iguazu.jpg
Can anyone identify these two lizards, photographed in Iguazu Falls National Park, Argentina, last Saturday? They were about 2.5 feet (76 cm) long. I'd like to place them in the appropriate article, with a suitable caption. JGHowes ^talk - 00:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks to be like it's a member of either the family Varanidae, Anguidae, or Scincidae. --4444hhhh (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

True, but none of those are native to Argentina. Looks more like a tegu.--Mike Searson (talk) 20:33, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thx, I've added this to Argentine Black and White Tegus JGHowes ^talk - 20:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Lizard push-ups

Lizards communicate not via sound, but instead using body movement ("push-ups").

I thought at first that they were compensating for not having stereo vision by first taking an image at position 1 (e.g., down) and storing it in their brains, then comparing / integrating that with a second image taken at position 2 (e.g., up). Indeed, a total of four images, 2 X 2 eyes. Maybe they are still indeed doing this vision enhancement, along with communicating. Jidanni (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah ha, compare Phasmatodea#Behaviour! Jidanni (talk) 06:20, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

main picture

I think the main picture should be a photo of a archtypal lizard. We already have numerous photos of different lizard species thoughout the article and that show the diversity of lizards. Thats how it's done in the dog, cat, snake, turtle and frog articles. 69.29.254.57 (talk) 21:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Oppose The current painting is preferable to any one photo of a particular lizard for the Infobox, as it serves as a better introduction for the reader to the diverse world of squamata JGHowes ^talk - 23:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Support The current painting has two flaws, IMHO. First, NONE of the lizards depicted are representative, but rather are extreme examples (note that 25% of the species pictured can glide). Secondly, and more importantly, it's small, low contrast, and generally shows up very poorly. I've got good eyes and a nice screen and I still find myself squinting and leaning in to make out the individuals. It would be good elsewhere in the article, but I think the main taxobox image should be a clear, simple, and representative (possibly some generic agamid or anole). Mokele (talk) 23:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Now we suffer the opposite problem, no diversity, no legless lizard, glider, chameleon or horny toad. Kjaer (talk) 04:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

number of tails?

From the lead:

Most lizards have four limbs, external ears, and one tail, although some lizards have been born with two tails as result of a developmental abnormality or genetic mutation.

How the fact that some lizards are mutants is relevant is beyond me. The snake article doesn't mention two heads. I intend to delete the phrase. Kjaer (talk) 04:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

apologies

For the inadvertent mis-carriage of editing justice. There was a vandalism in-between ("stupid pets"), but did much worse myself. Sorry. Thanks to subsequent ed/bot 212.188.108.250 (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries, you'll get the hang of it. :) My apologies for being a little overzealous with the warning. I went back and saw the vandalism you were trying to get rid of and realized you had probably made a mistake. I removed the warning from your page. Jomasecu ^talk _contribs 20:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

More Diverse Pictures?

Currently we have pictures of the following lizards:

• Bearded dragon (Pogona) an agamid iguanine
• Collard Lizard (Chlamydosaurus) an agamid iguanine
• Iguana iguana an iguanid iguanine
• Baslisk (Basilicus) an iguanid iguanine
• Zebra Tail (Calisaurus) an iguanid iguanine
• Agama agama an agamid iguanine
• Varanus komodoensis a varanid
• Gila monster a varanoid anguimorph

Does anyone notice a trend? We have no chameleon, no gecko, no amphisbaenid, no lacertoid, and no anguid.

I think two of the iguanids and two of the agamids can go, and we should add a chamaleon, a gecko, an amphisbaenid and a skink. I would also like to replace one of the iguanines with a horny toad to show the uniquely squat form. So the question is what to retain as the "typical" lizard. I think the bearded dragon (our current example) fits the bill. Finally, how about a mosasaur instead of Varanus? Any comments?Kjaer (talk) 04:21, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I have added a much more diverse bunch of llizards.

intro

I have rewritten the intro to be a bit more definitive and inclusive and to try to explain the paraphyletic status of the lizards. Please advise or edit if what I have written is unclear. Kjaer (talk) 03:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

internal branches

we need to discuss the internal evolution of the lizards, into the iguanines, geckos, amphisbaenids, skinks and varanoids, as well as the snakes.Kjaer (talk) 02:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

working paragraph:

Finally, the lizards would diversify into several distinctive types. The iguanines, a clade which includes the iguanids, the agamids and the chameleons, primitively retained an unspecialized fleshy tongue, yet the chameleons obviously modified theirs as they differentiated from the group. The geckos and other

'Godzilla' Family

Killed it with fire folks.--24.7.167.16 (talk) 05:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Fear of lizards

I found on several online sources (yahoo! answers etc.) that the word for the fear of lizards is scoliodentosaurophobia. However, I could not find it in my dictionary (Merriam-Websters). Could someone please check an authoritative source and include this in the article? Gjnyasa (talk) 16:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Lack of Cladograms

Give us some cladograms, please! Of course, including snakes and mosasaurs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.70.84.222 (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

If you know any, go ahead and add them. From what I know, there's still a fair bit of controversy over the exact phylogeny of lizards. Mokele (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

What lizard is this?

I was in Istanbul and saw this lizard. I was wondering if it could be used if there isn't a decent picture of this particular species of lizard.

• 

  Spiderone (talk) 08:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

You may get a quicker answer by posting this question to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. William Avery (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Third eye

I just read an article on wired.com talking about a third eye on lizards and how they use it to navigate via sun and their biological clock. As close as i can tell by a quick skim, there is no reference to this subject in our article. This is the link to the article: Wired Science News for Your Neurons - Lizards Use Third Eye to Steer by the Sun Could someone with more knowledge of the topic maybe add this? Thanks :) Dillard421♂♂ ^{(talk to me)} 19:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Domain Eukarya

OK, no more damn revert-wars. I want to see some actual justification for why Domain should not be included in the taxobox, especially since it is accurate information that is present in other taxoboxes such as Trypanosoma_rangeli, Limuloides, Goniotrichales, Macoma_nasuta and dozens or hundreds of others. Any edit, in either direction, that occurs without discussion here will earn a report to the admins for edit-warring Mokele (talk) 18:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Eukarya request for comment

Should we keep the Domain: Eukarya in the taxobox or not? Mokele (talk) 21:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

• Abundantly obvious: Yes -- it's appropriate, useful information highly consistent with other articles. I note the continuous disruption has come from seemingly a dynamic IP address. 78.144.191.16 (talk · contribs) 89.241.57.179 (talk · contribs) 78.144.111.3 (talk · contribs) 78.150.183.177 (talk · contribs) 78.149.72.180 (talk · contribs) 89.242.185.147 (talk · contribs) As such, I'll semi-protect the page...perhaps the individual(s) in question can provide a cogent argument for this pattern of edits? — Scientizzle 20:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
• No -- The domains are of limited interest to those seeking information on lizards, and in my view merely clutter up the taxon box. If they seek information on domain-level, low level articles like this will hardly be their entry point.Petter Bøckman (talk) 07:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
• Yes - It's no more or less obscure or important than anything else in the taxobox. Mokele (talk) 01:42, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
• Absolutely not - it just clutters up the page and it is infact Eukaryota. 78.150.144.231 (talk) 14:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
• No -- It's unnecessary. Though I wouldn't really mind either way, personally. In the meantime I am fixing it to Eukaryota, as it is the correct scientific name. Pililoni - AKA Little Blue Penguin (talk) 20:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
• Huh? Am I missing something? A lizard is a eukaryote, but what's the big deal either way? MiRroar (talk) 23:06, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
• No Elsewhere it is used where there may be doubt Red algae, Gymnophryid etc. but it is not used for fungi, plants or animals. It may be correct, but shouldn't be included for the same reason I don't write "...Earth, Solar System, Milky Way." when addressing envelopes. --Pontificalibus (talk) 09:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Eukaryota/Eukarya

Eukaryota/Eukarya shouldn't be here. IT'S NOT REQUIRED. For damn's sake. It is no way formal. It a whole load of vandalism. 78.151.23.110 (talk) 16:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Wrong. If you had the slightest familiarity with current science, you'd be familiar with the Domains. Evidently, you lack that expertise. Mokele (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Lacertilia vs. Scleroglossa?

Someone more knowledgeable than I needs to clear up this confusion. Both Scleroglossa and Lacertilia are listed as being the suborders in which Gekkota and Scincomorpha etc are found, yet Scleroglossa claims to contain Serpentes, which, as I understand it, is a Suborder, not an infraorder? On the Squamata page, it is listed as both.

From what I understand, the definition is not yet clear? As such, it is extremely confusing, and clarifications of this discrepency should perhaps be provided somewhere? - Mark.scherz (talk) 11:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Recent extinctions due to global warming

Detailed surveys of lizard populations in regions where temperature increases have been recorded show a decrease in lizard populations. Some lizard populations worldwide have recently become extinct due to global warming. Barry Sinervo (Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of California in Santa Cruz) along with colleagues from across the globe, reached these conclusions after comparing their field studies of the lizards in Mexico with extensive data from around the world. Ref: AAAS News Services www.aaas.org/news/releases/2010/0513sp_lizard.shtml

99.36.18.201 (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Suborder or Infraorder?

The way I see it:

• Order Squamata
  • Suborder Lacertilia
    • Infraorder Iguania
    • Infraorder Scincomorpha
    • Infraorder Varanoidea

It makes the most sense. And Wikispecies tends to agree. Is it just me, or does the lizard's taxonomy on Wikipedia have to be (nearly) totally redone and updated? --TangoFett (talk) 05:08, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

What matters is what the reliable sources say, not wikispecies. I suggest referring to Erik Pianka's Lizards: Windows to the Evolution of Diversity. μηδείς (talk) 05:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

But doesn't Wikispecies run on reliable sources? --TangoFett (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Not every project is kept constantly up to date with every other. If you want to volunteer to do the work, feel free. Mokele (talk) 12:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikispecies itself is not a reliable source. Pianka's book is highly respected and widely available. The section Lizard diversification is incomplete (Amphisbaenia and Autarchoglossia have not yet been expounded upon) but follows Pianka.μηδείς (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Lizards are an offshoot of mammals??

I just deleted the following text from the intro section:

While lizards are commonly associated with prehistoric reptiles such as dinosaurs, scientists are still unsure as to whether or not contemporary lizards and dinosaurs are of same evolutionary chain. The prevailing notion among lizard experts is that, while remarkably similar to prehistoric reptilian creatures, modern lizards are an evolutionary off shoot of mammals. They have, however, adapted and learned to survive by the same means as many dinosaurs.

It was all added in a single edit on Sep 16th, and there were no citations, and I'm fairly certain that lizards are reptiles, not an offshoot of mammals. In any case, I'd be very surprised to learn that that was the "prevailing notion among lizard experts". If I'm wrong, somebody can add it back in with proper citations. Torgo (talk) 21:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

This article is missing any mention of eggs

There is nothing in this article about eggs. Suggest adding something. Thanks. --Bob K31416 (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, Evolution in Action: Lizard Moving From Eggs to Live Birth, National Geographic. --Bob K31416 (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Rock paper scissors lizard spock

Lizard poisons Spock. That should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.142.136.116 (talk) 12:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

dewlap

I have commented out the image until we can get an identification of the species. μηδείς (talk) 02:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Number of species

We could use a better source than the volunteer-maintained "REPTILE DATABASE" website for the number of species, but an anonymously-written "Amazing Animal Facts" website seems worse, not better, here. You can plug "over X species of lizard" into Google for any value of thousands and get a variety of equally weak websites to back you up. We need reliable sources! --McGeddon (talk) 19:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

I was surprised to come back to this article today to see that Dylan Bruner had again changed this information. I restored the original source, which isn't ideal but is far superior to Bioexpedition.com, which as far as I can tell does not appear to offer any kind of author, parent organization, or even contact information short of a form. The closest thing I see is the ad for basicplanet.com on every single page, which offers some fee-based educational resources. There's nothing to lend this site credibility, and plenty (e.g. being a feeder site for a subscription service) indicating its unreliability. Reptile-database.org, on the other hand, is a volunteer-run reptile information source with editorial oversight and documentation of methods and sources. It cites 29,000 books and papers, tracks a long list of journals, and credits contributors. There is no question which is the more reliable source. If you find a better source, discuss it here on the talk page to gain consensus before making another change. Saying you "don't want an edit war" in your edit summary while restoring the same content is edit warring. --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC) show adaptations here--123.211.176.145 (talk) 05:54, 16 March 2015 (UTC) ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________-______________ thanks kyle mono

peace

Mosasaur picture

Hi! The mosasaur picture used on the Lizard page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prognathodon3.jpg is outdated. It's known many mosasaurs had a bilobed tail. Prognathodon, the mosasaur in the picture is one known to definitely have a bilobed tail thanks to a fossil of it showing the tail fins. Could someone please change the mosasaur picture on the Lizard page to an up to date picture? Good choices could be this one of Prognathodon: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prognathodon_saturator_DB.jpg or this one of Platecarpus: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Platecarpus2010.jpg 90.201.190.75 (talk) 15:43, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Already done see this edit by Dinoguy2 (talk · contribs) at 16:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC). Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. Mz7 (talk) 06:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2015

lol 71.203.107.48 (talk) 02:37, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Not done: Not an actual edit request. Altamel (talk) 03:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

While an interesting trivium about a particular species of lizard, I'm not sure the following text belongs on the "Lizards" page... In just a couple of decades, 5-inch lizards have developed an utterly new gut structure, larger heads, and a compact bite, according to researchers.[16] If it DOES belong, I suggest replacing "5-inch lizards" with the name & link to the species in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_wall_lizard NorthBayGeek (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lizard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140708101506/http://www.biology.ucr.edu/people/faculty/Garland/The_Lizards_Living_in_Qatar_2014.pdf to http://www.biology.ucr.edu/people/faculty/Garland/The_Lizards_Living_in_Qatar_2014.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Types of Lizards

While this may vary based on interpretation, the major groups/ families of lizards are the Diploglossa, Gekkota, Iguania, Platynota, and Scincomorpha. Diploglossa's are typically knob scaled and American legless lizards. Gekkotas are gekkos, blind, and legless lizards. Iguania's consist of iguanas, agamas, anoles, chameleons, and they are earless lizards. Scincomorpha's are known as night lizards. Most lizards have four legs, but some only have two, and very few are completely legless. There are also only two types of venomous lizards, and those are the gila monsters (platynota lizards) and the Mexican beaded lizard. Within these groups/families of lizards, there are many other types of lizards. <ref>http://www.factzoo.com/reptiles/types-of-lizards.html/ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinaa123 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Replacing name by Latin

I think that Lizard refers more to an informal. wouldn't it be more accurate to replace the name by Lacertilia. Rebelpino (talk) 09:42, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Lizard collage

The collage of different lizards includes an earthworm.--Fruitloop11 (talk) 15:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

That's an Anelytropsis papillosus, a legless lizard. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:33, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2018

The Lizard is very cute and furry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganjigirl (talk • contribs) 21:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Shape-Shifting Lizards

It has come to my attention that our government is controlled by shape-shifting lizards. Some of these traitors are: Shaquille O'Neal Steph Curry Queen Elizabeth Qin Ping Vladmir Putin Lonzo Ball Kim Jong Un Ms. Kvamme John Dewey

Oh noo! She found my hideout!!!! Don't kill me! Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo0000000000ooooooooooooooooooooooo0000000000000000000000000000000000oooooooooooooooooooooo (im dead) Any thing below this line is written by evil Ms. Kvamme

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnhollandIV (talk • contribs) 16:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC) 

Paraphyletic

"The group is paraphyletic as it excludes the snakes and Amphisbaenia which are also squamates." The exclusion of snakes and amphisbaenians from "lizards" doesn't make lizards paraphyletic because they are also squamates, it makes lizards paraphyletic because some lizards are more closely related to snakes or amphisbaenians than they are to other lizards. Snakes and amphisbaenians arose from within the lizards. --Khajidha (talk) 14:19, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2019

I am suggesting fixes for some minor grammar issues and inconsistencies.
Please change "In lace monitors, the young hatch close to 300 days and the female returns to help them escape the termite mound were the eggs were laid." to "In lace monitors, the young hatch after about 300 days, and the female returns to help them escape the termite mound where the eggs were laid."
The caption "Two pictures taken on an eastern fence lizard egg and layered onto one image ." is bulky, I suggest "Two views of an eastern fence lizard egg."
In the sentence beginning, "Due to their small size and ingestible chitin," I believe the word should be "indigestible" given the context of the sentence.
Please change "Lizards partially regenerate their tails over a period of weeks." to "Some lizards can partially regenerate their tails over a period of weeks." since not all lizards that exhibit autotomy can regrow their tails (e.g. crested geckos).
Suggest changing "Lizards typically have four legs, feet and external ears, though some are legless, while snakes lack both of these characteristics." to "Lizards typically have four legs, feet and external ears (though some are legless), while snakes lack these characteristics." for better sentence flow.

Contradictory statements found in article: "Lizards typically have...external ears" and "Lizards lack external ears". The full sentence "Lizards lack external ears, having instead a circular opening in which the tympanic membrane (eardrum) can be seen." accurately describes the morphology, but that opening is still generally considered to be an external ear for the purposes of distinguishing from snakes. I suggest "Lizard ears consist of circular openings behind each eye in which the tympanic membrane (eardrum) can be seen. These external ear holes do not extend beyond the skull as mammalian ears do."
Please take my suggestions into consideration. GourmetWaffles (talk) 08:29, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

 Partly done: The grammar was changed where indicated, except the caption for the photograph, which is sufficient. The claims regarding ears require sources which were not provided. If these references are ones already used in the article, please indicate which of these sources are to be used with the re-phrased additions.  Spintendo  13:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2019

I would like to correct the facts on this page 24.115.180.119 (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. aboideau^talk 21:00, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Contradiction on inclusion of snakes

In the introduction section, it states: The group is paraphyletic as it excludes the snakes and Amphisbaenia

However, in 1.2 Distinguishing features, it states: Some are legless, including snakes.

I don't believe I'm qualified to accurately correct this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:F907:500:A9D9:A05F:51AD:40CF (talk) 19:31, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Lizards by traditional definition exclude snakes, although some legless groups are recognised as lizards. Why these are lizards and snakes are not is purely down to the history of the terms. Its all very messy.   Jts1882 | talk  17:41, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2020

"Until 2006 it was thought that among lizards, only the Gila monster and the Mexican beaded lizard were venomous."

This is an awkwardly worded sentence. Please change it to:

"Until 2006 it was thought that the Gila monster and the Mexican beaded lizard were the only venomous lizards." 2601:5C6:8081:35C0:876:394F:1ACA:A79C (talk) 10:13, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done —  Jts1882 | talk  10:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

"Exclusion" of Amphisbaenia in cladogram at Lizard#Internal

Why are Amphisbaenia marked as "excluded", when they are (shown in the cladogram as) more closely related to the "true lizards" (Lacertidae) than are the other "non-true lizards" (i.e., all that are not Lacertidae)? ZFT (talk) 07:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Because lizard is a common name traditionally used for a type of reptiles with legs. Snakes and amphisbaenians were considered as different animals, while geckos and iguanians are types of lizard in common language. Now we know they have a common ancestor, but the old name is too ingrained. From a scientific perspective, snakes and amphisbaenians would be lizards if lizard was used as the common name for Squamata, just as birds can be considered as reptiles or dinosaurs or all of them as a type of fish with specialised fins. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:53, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

What about the other legless lizard groups? ZFT (talk) 10:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Good question. For some reason they have always been considered lizards, whereas snakes and amphisbaenians were not. It's not logical, but if we spend too much time trying to understand common language terms logically we will go crazy. —  Jts1882 | talk  10:12, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Typo on egg picture caption

I can't edit it for whatever reason but the caption on the egg photo has a typo: `Two pictures taken on an eastern fence lizard egg and layered onto one image.` Replace on with of. 149.167.140.198 (talk)lrb

I've changed it to "Two pictures of an eastern fence lizard egg layered onto one image", which is more succinct. I don't understand what the difference between the two images is. Are they top and bottom images showing different colours or is the difference something to do with the direction of illumination (the text in the image). Is there any reason for the caption saying more than "Egg of eastern fence lizard"?

Semi-protected edit request on 23 July 2021

In the introduction, please link the phrase "Others are legless" to the Legless lizard article. 64.203.186.71 (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done by another user. TungstenTime (talk) 12:25, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

[[ Scients belive that 100-5000 species of lizard are poisonous or venomous. 14:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC) off google — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prludwi000 (talk • contribs)