Talk:Cricket (insect)/Archive 1

Question

Er, is a mole cricket a cricket or not? The atricle explains mole crickets as if they are true crickets, like field and tree varieties, but then lists it as a false cricket. --Spikey 02:26, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Too silly of a correction?

The article states that crickets are used to indicate a joke has bombed because the room gets so quiet you can hear the crickets. But in a lot of old movies, the crickets becoming silent is an indication danger is approaching; the crickets' chirping indicate no-one is moving. Not just silence. 69.143.57.0 (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

True or false??

how do they come up with there songs that they chirp True or false: the poem text at the bottom of this article should be at Cricket (disambiguation). 66.245.112.43 22:14, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

True. --Yath 22:36, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Should primary topic cricket be the sport or a disambiguation page?

See Talk:Cricket#Why_is_the_sport_here_and_not_the_insect.3F for discussion. Nereocystis 20:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

It's been removed or archived. Kortoso (talk) 17:05, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The blackish Cricket

I'd like to know what crickets eat. Where I live we have the black kind (ground cricket?). I'd also like to know if they hibernate.

Recently I found what I thought was an albino cricket in our compost heap. I captured it, and the next day it had turned black again. I also think that it might have been a female because, when I found it, it was dragging a dead companion. Do male crickets die after mating?

--141.209.178.238 11:37, 30 August 2005 (UTC)Tetsufu

The "albino" cricket you found had actually just molted, which is why it's exoskeleton turned black again. Once an exoskeleton has been formed, it can only expand a very small amount which is why certain insects who grow over their lifespans will often shed several exoskeletons. Male crickets live after mating, so the cricket you found was likely dragging along it's own old exoskeleton. Crickets are omnivorous, so while they usually eat plant matter they will also consume dead insects and even live ones, or pretty much anything that has nutritional value. Some also hibernate, or at least try too: they rarely survive the winter, so if you see a cricket odds are that it hatched just that spring season. RentACop 03:07, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

What are these?

Does anyone know what these are? They look like crickets, but I'm not even sure about that. I photographed them in Panama, near Santa Fe, central west, up in the hills. And if you know about more animals you might want to look at some more photos that need identifying at User:DirkvdM/Photographs#Plants_and_Animals. DirkvdM 07:58, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Wow, those are neat looking. I'm not sure what they are, but the shape of the head gives me the impression that they are a type of grasshopper, and since they lack wings they're likely still early in development, maybe in the first couple instars. I'm thinking they're Lubber Grasshoppers, as they look similar to the picture below of a Lubber from panama. Of course, the color scheme is different, but that's not uncommon: the lubber in the pic is a juvinile and as an adult it's color scheme is a very different purple color. RentACop 17:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~lmann/CIMG0897.JPG

Thanks, they really look a lot alike. Or do grasshopper species generally look so much alike? I'll put the pic in the gallery at grasshopper and ask at that talk page to see if I get a more definitive answer there. DirkvdM 07:34, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree their heads (and legs) look like grasshoppers', but grasshoppers have wings. I'm not sure what they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.57.0 (talk) 02:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Diet?

they eat grass,seeds,fungi,...anything in the plant family and others.:)

Legless Crickets...

I have many of the typical black crickets living around my area and in my back yard (picture B on the page). They get in my house and are incredibly annoying..but a strange thing I have noticed about them is that it is not uncommon for them to have a leg missing. Not only that, but I once picked one up by the antenna and held it for a short while as I watched it struggling crazily to escape when one of it's legs just shot off! It kinda freaked me out so I haven't really touched them since...anyone know anything about this?

Giving up a leg might be a survival method. I too have seen amputee crickets. Pendragon39 03:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah an interesting thing is it just happened again a few days ago. This time I just sprayed one with Raid and watched it slowly die and it's leg just came off...it's so weird. I wonder if they grow back or anything? It seems like it just unattaches from the joint and falls, causing them no pain at all, unlike humans where if we lost a leg there'd be blood everywhere.

Sadist

Not when the darn thing has been chirping all night!

I find their chirping quite soothing :) Pendragon39 20:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Well this is the question i came here to find out! Ill find a cricket or two in my basement almost every day in Fall. And alot of them are missing a leg. Well the other day, i found a cricket dying (upside down, wrigling around a little) and both its back legs were off, they were both lying within half a foot from the cricket. Its like their legs will just fall off for no reason. I find them disgusting and hate em almost as much as i hate houseflies >:( -Dave p.s. their chirping isnt so relaxing when its just one of em echoing nice and loud in your furnace room when youre trying to sleep.

YOU ARE SO MEAN!!! --Cricket Boy 21:23, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

YOU ARE SO IMMATURE. Have you tried to sleep with those things existing near you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.210.120.214 (talk) 01:33, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree :( Pendragon39 21:52, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

One of my male crickets is missing a back leg, and he can't chirp. His wings buzz, but there's no sound with it. I wonder if there's any connection with his leglessness and his chirplessness. the rest of my crickets are in good health. oh and, will his lack of voice mean no chance with the ladies i wonder? quite possibly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.133.87 (talk) 13:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a connection; they chirp with their hind legs. Or so I was told way back in grade school. 69.143.57.0 (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Chirping season

I like crickets and sometimes observe them. I notice they don't start chirping in my backyard until late July. In other areas though, such as sandy roadsides, it is common to hear chirping in early summer. I would like to know if this difference is due to habitat or species. Pendragon39 03:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I typed "cricket" looking for info on the insect

And I got something about some weird game they play in England. Why? I think a disambiguation page would make the most sense.

There is a disambiguation page, but cricket doesn't take us there. Ideally cricket should go to Cricket_(disambiguation) and Cricket should go to the game. Someone please fix this! Pendragon39 22:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I fixed it now. Malamockq 16:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Ahh great so 2 people NINE months apart think that cricket should not point to its primary usage and you take that as a concensus? Wow, I'm underwhelmed. --LiamE 00:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

That would be 3 people. I'm underwhelmed too. Perhaps concensus should redirect to the sport too, why let spelling or capitalization get in the way of expediency? Pendragon39 02:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

And perhaps "Spelling Nazi" should redirect there too. --LiamE 22:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

How long do they live?!

Clearly a missing information.

Field crickets live at least 1 month after reaching adulthood. The time it takes for a cricket to reach adulthood may be several months, and up to a year if it undergoes diapause. Pendragon39 05:35, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion on changing Cricket from the sport to a disambiguation page

As some have suggested before, Cricket should redirect to a disambiguation page instead of to the sport cricket.

The discussion can be found here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cricket#Requested_move. Opinions are welcome. Malamockq 19:03, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for attempting the move but it is clear from past discussions that this is strongly opposed. Pendragon39 22:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It's only opposed by fans of that game. That's hardly a consensus... Malamockq 22:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but they form a majority and that is usually enough to veto any change they do not like. The guidelines on disambiguations don't help, it gives priority to popularity and Google hit counts over informing the reader. Pendragon39 23:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Google hits alone do not determine what "Cricket" should direct to. Logically, there would be more websites about a sport, than about an insect that no one pays too much attention to outside of academics. But most people know that a cricket is an insect or at least a small bug if nothing else. They simply do not care about it, like fans of a sport would. There's a difference between something being popular, and something commonly known and understood. In that case, both are commonly known and understood, therefore Cricket should direct to the disambiguation page. Malamockq 03:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but apparently Wikipedia has decided to show results based on popularity when you click on Go and even when you select Search. They prefer to do that instead of showing a disambiguation page as the first logical step. The meanings of the word cricket are clear and substantial. IMO encyclopedias should be about conveying the meanings of words first and foremost. Until the guidelines regarding this are changed, the sports fans will simply use it as if it were made of stone and keep the status quo :( Pendragon39 03:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Malamockq, you have defeated your own argument for a move. The fact is a lot of people know that cricket is a bug, but, as you correctly point out, they just don't care about it and are unlikely to look it up in an encyclopedia. On the other hand you have the masses of English speaking cricket fans around the world that care deeply about a sport and are information hungry. These sports fans vastly outnumber the entymologists and therefore there is a primary use for the word cricket. This is reflected in the nuumber of cricket articles on wikipedia, the number of google hits the sport gets on a search and pehaps more tellingly the order British/International English dictionaries and encyclopedias give to the alternate meanings. --LiamE 00:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Luckily, encyclopedias do not cater to sports fans desires over factual information. The fact is, the insect is notable and equally as important as the sport, regardless of how many sports fans there are over the number of people who wish to learn more about insects. Malamockq 02:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Then why does every encyclopedia and dictionary I own list the sport before the bug? Do you not accept that most people searching wikipedia for cricket are looking for the sport? --LiamE 22:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

That's not the point (although you probably bought all of your encyclopedias and dictionaries in the British Commonwealth). There is no primary definition of "cricket" (although the insect is not known by any other name in the English speaking world). And that's exactly what a disambiguation page is intended to support.

The question is: Would a disambiguation page bring intolerable hardship to the British sporting world? Kortoso (talk) 17:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Chirping interrupted by changes in lighting

Mention chirping is often interrupted momentarily when nearby lights are turned on or off. Probably by lightning too. Jidanni 01:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Is that a startle reflex? Crickets are good at detecting motion and know when to stop chirping. Pendragon39 15:58, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember hearing a cricket chirp during the day time.

Do they only chirp during the night?

They chirp day and night. You didn't remember to sign your postPendragon39 (talk) 22:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Remember that they are nocturnal, so night is when they're most active and probably more likely to be heard chirping. 70.171.246.151 (talk) 12:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

mine chirp more when it's dark. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.133.87 (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

I restored a previous version of the page after some very juvenile person replaced the taxonomy section with "They have huge penises". ReaperRob (talk) 12:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC) hi i am a person who decided to do something stupid and "edit this page"...??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.205.136.42 (talk) 01:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

black stuff on cricket cerci

I keep a lot of crickets and was wondering if any one knows how to prevent the appearance of a black substance that forms on the cerci of the cricket. Any information on this topic would be greatly appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.0.19 (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Cricket in Chinese culture: not as a symbol of good luck

There is no evidence that in ancient or modern China cricket is regarded as symbol of good luck. The fact is, cricket has been widely used as cricket fighting, which itself is similar to the modern sports betting. Fighting and betting on crickets were even very common in many royal courts. I can cite as many sources to prove my point as you want me to provide (100? How about 500? there are tons of poems, novels, history record about cricket fighting and betting).

Some people in China also cook and eat crickets as I believe it's crispy (and can be said nutritious and healthy from the point view of modern culture?), although I haven't have chance to try out myself (and not yearn to do it). And almost in all cases people eat it because it's fun and exotic (kind of eating shark fin soup but way much cheap and environmentally friendly).

The only place I know cricket as good luck is in Disney's animation movie Mulan. It maybe true in other Asian areas, but not in China.

In the process of writing my comment here, I just gooled out a website solely dedicated to cricket [(http://cricket.intopet.com/] (in Chinese).

Also, I want to remind Wikipedia contributors that if you guys want to write something about China, especially about Chinese culture, you got to know a lot about China and know you source(s); many times even being a native Chinese is far from enough. Also, many books about China written by Western scholars got tons of basic facts wrong. That's how hard to make donkey talking to elephant, or vice versa.

I came to realize several years ago that the Wikipedia part in Chinese is really in bad shape as most Chinese are not much enthusiastic about it because there are several similar and much larger and authoritative projects in Chinese. The counterpart in English about China and Chinese is consequently suffering. IMHO, Wikipedia needs significant improvement for that (articles written in Chinese and in English about China and Chinese; sorry I don't care anything in other languages b/c I don't understand them). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.191.24 (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Chirp cause - legs or wings?

The article claims:

The chirp (which only male crickets can do) is generated by raising the 
left hind leg to a 45 degree angle and rubbing it against the right hind 
leg edge of the right hind leg

However the first two external links refer to wings, for example:

When they stridulate, or chirp, crickets rub the teeth on the sharp edge 
of one wing against a particularly thick and rough scraper on the opposite wing

I don't know enough about the subject to know which is true, I hope a resident expert will weigh in. --SPhilbrickT 19:05, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

"true crickets"?

Where does this naming come from and what does it even mean? It's never explained. Are there "non-true" crickets? I'm really tempted to remove it. --uKER (talk) 23:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm no entomologist, but I've heard the phrase used a lot to distinguish between family Gryllidae and other related critters that are sometimes called crickets or have "cricket" in their common name, a distinction implicitly made in Cricket (insect)#Taxonomy. Here are some uses of the term:

• Family Gryllidae - True Crickets Bug Guide photo gallery
• Orthopteroids 4 - True Crickets, Ground Hoppers, Cockroaches, Earwigs a nature photographer's site
• True Crickets - Gryllidae another nature photographer's gallery
• Gryllidae: True Crickets Fauna Paraguay
• Comparative morphology of cercal structures in true crickets and their allies (Orthoptera, Ensifera): a phylogenetic perspective article in the Journal Zoomorphology

-- ToE^T 15:31, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

How much time do a cricket live?

The "Life cycle" part of the article doesn't day anything about the how much time those creatures do live. In fact, it doesn't focus too much on life cycle at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.77.212.142 (talk) 10:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Add to Popular Culture: Cricket Wireless

Cricket Wireless (Cricket Communications, a subsidiary of Leap Wireless), or simply Cricket, references the insect as seen on its logotype, where the the upper portion of letter "K" resembles a pair of long antennae. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.48.72.69 (talk) 01:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Lead image

I wonder if File:Gryllus campestris MHNT.jpg (in the gallery) wouldn't be a better choice for the lead - simple, clear, obviously a real cricket. The historic drawings are interesting but maybe better in a history section. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:08, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Prioritize?

I am responding to a request to help with the editing of this article. Is there a prioritized list of things you want done written by other editors (Chiswick Chap) et. al.?

  Bfpage |leave a message  20:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

At the moment the article is very unbalanced, with much on chirping and little on other behaviours, ecology, distribution, habitat, taxonomy and evolution. What there is needs further citations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:24, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposal to rename this article

If you look at the article Ensifera you will see that there are many species in various families that have the word "cricket" in their common names. As the taxobox shows, this article is about the family Gryllidae, the true crickets. I think that the present name "Cricket (insect)" is problematic and I propose that the article be renamed "Gryllidae". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

This seems a sensible suggestion as there is plentiful scope for confusion. Since the existing name will remain as a search term (and will be highlighted in the lead), effectively nothing will be lost, and the article will be clearer and easier to focus. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:32, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cricket (insect). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150527072448/http://insected.arizona.edu/cricketinfo.htm to http://insected.arizona.edu/cricketinfo.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

chirping

nice article; fun to read. i came here, though, to learn why crickets pause in their chirping, sometimes briefly, sometimes for a long time, then resume. do they get tired?, etc. also, i'd like to know why they stop chirping when they stop; what their stopping means (if anything). maybe these things could be included in the section on chirping. thanks. 63.142.146.194 (talk) 07:33, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The different patterns of chirps and pauses serve to mark out the different cricket species from each other, so each species signals to other individuals of the same species. Singing is also faster on hot days, and can be interrupted by predators or other disturbance. These facts indicate there could be many explanations of any particular pause. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:04, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Undue coverage of one 'human' subtopic, the subsubtopic of use as food

An editor with 'alien food' in their username has attempted to add a substantial amount of material (over 3 kBytes) on the use of crickets as food. It is not clear whether this is simply a strong interest in the topic (implying a possible WP:COATRACK) or a commercial and promotional interest (implying a possible WP:ADV); either way, the additions seem to be WP:UNDUE, see the next paragraph. It may be observed that there is nothing alien about eating insects, as the practice is as old as humanity and is widespread in the majority of human cultures, modern Western society mostly excepted; and that the topic is by no means limited to crickets or indeed Orthoptera, as the practice involves hundreds of insect species from different orders.

Use as food is a subtopic of 'In human culture', itself a subtopic of an article about an insect. Without the additions, the 'In human culture' occupies about 1/4 of the body of the article, certainly long enough for the subtopic; and of that, the subsubtopic 'As food' is about the same length as each of the other 4 'human' subsubtopics, its two paragraphs (human food, food for other animals) and one image appearing proportionate. The text already links to entomophagy, the article on the topic of using insects as food. I have therefore reverted the (partly uncited) additions, much of it needlessly copied from the entomophagy article, per WP:UNDUE. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

This was how I extended the paragraph on using crickets as food, which is currently a widely discussed topic in Europe and the US:

→‎As food for humans

Deep-fried house crickets (Acheta domesticus) at a market in Thailand

Crickets are an edible insect often integrated into food. Crickets are abundant in protein and low in fat.

In the southern part of Asia including Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam, crickets are commonly eaten as a snack, prepared by deep frying the soaked and cleaned insects. In Thailand, there are 20,000 farmers rearing crickets, with an estimated production of 7,500 tons per year and United Nation's FAO has implemented a project in Laos to improve cricket farming and consequently food security. The food conversion efficiency of house crickets (Acheta domesticus) is 1.7, some five times higher than that for beef cattle, and if their fecundity is taken into account, 15 to 20 times higher.

Freeze-dried house crickets as food (or food ingredient)

File:BugsyBros.jpg

Fusilli made of cricket flour

In Western countries, crickets for food are usually dried and ground into a powder (cricket flour). Several companies in the US, such as Tiny Farms, All Things Bugs, and ASPIRE Food Group (Entomo Farms in Canada) farm crickets or produce cricket powder for use in protein bars and baked goods. The first company to use cricket powder was Chapul, which launched a project in 2012 to make a protein bar, followed in 2013 by protein bars from Exo, and in 2016 by pasta containing 20% cricket powder from Bugsolutely.

Producing baked goods with cricket powder has similar protein to that of conventional livestock (such as beef), if not more, and has far less fat and cholesterol than that of beef. Baked goods using cricket powder include mint cricket cookies with a chocolate exterior, soft doughy cricket brownies with a thin crispy layer, and moist banana cricket bread.

The reason for the addition was that I see a need of more information about cricket rearing and the role of crickets as productive lifestock here. Because of the significance of the topic (for example compared to the role of crickets in literature which is explained in detail in the article) I don't consider two paragraphs the definition of UNDUE. Instead of supporting the progression of the article, for example supporting me in shortening/summarizing this, User Chiswick Chap decided to make it easy for himself and just delete it. Please feel free to decide for yourself whether these two paragraphs contain information that would enrich our article on crickets. --AlienFood (talk) 07:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing. I remain convinced that a lengthy addition of this kind is WP:UNDUE for a subsection-of-a-subsection in an article about a group of insects, not an article about the use of a specific insect for food for humans. It's unduly long because a) it makes the subsubsection much longer than the other subsubsections, and b) it makes the 'humans' subsection unduly long compared to the article's main topic, the insect's biology. In other words, undueness depends on the context; the material you copied from Entomophagy was due in that article, and belongs there, not here. The subsubtopic is already well covered over there, and I note that I believe you are entirely wrong both to try to document entomophagy here in great detail, and to argue that the use of insects as food is somehow different from entomophagy: they're the same thing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, too. Okay, we will leave it as it is, until the community decides differently. But, just to make this clear: I am not saying that eating insects (entomophagy) and the use of insects as food is not the same; I am saying that eating insects (entomophagy) and edible insects (food insects; food item with aspects of reaeing/farming, nutritional value, food regulation, processing into products) is not the same. And it isn't --AlienFood (talk) 12:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

The set-of-all-edible insects is indeed not the same as entomophagy/use-of-insects-as-food, but the latter two expressions are, I'm glad you agree, exact synonyms, so the creation of an article on the latter is a pure WP:FORK and must end with a redirect. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

I would agree if we rename the article edible insects and redirect insects as food to it. But entomophagy is something different (biological, cultural, even not exclusively referring to humans). --AlienFood (talk) 13:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Even not exclusively human: "insects as food" also applies to pets and zoo animals. You are trying to create a difference where none exists; "insects as food" can't help including cultural aspects of eating insects. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:23, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

References

Requested move 29 July 2019

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: not moved. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 01:52, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

---

Cricket (insect) → Gryllidae – Even the term "true crickets" is too Europe/N. America-centric IMO and from a taxonomic point of view, simply out of date. The term "cricket (insect)" can refer to other families and should point to the superfamily Grylloidea. For example, here in Asia (and what about S. America?) a cricket-looking insect could easily belong to the Phalangopsidae or Trigonidiidae. Alternatively, we could change the Taxobox and insert a section on the other families I suppose. Whereas WP policy is to encourage the use of English names, and very understandable for most vertebrates, I think it is fraught with difficulties for insects and other groups, where the taxonomy is still 'dynamic' to say the least (not to mention US-UK differences) I therefore prefer defaulting to the scientific term with English name redirects (and note dab pages are frequently needed). Same applies to "field cricket" BTW, but let's see what happens here first ... Roy Bateman (talk) 05:14, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose, "cricket" is the common and most familiar name for the insect in English. Randy Kryn (talk) 10:17, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose/Split - sounds like a need for a {{Paraphyletic group}} more than anything. Gryllidae has a specific meaning, and should be split from the messy vernacular name into anew article. --Nessie (talk) 10:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose move. Obvious COMMONNAME situation. O.N.R. ^(talk) 15:23, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:11, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:RECOGNIZABILITY. If the taxonomic referent of "cricket" is ambiguous, I'd support Nessie's suggestion to split off a small separate article on Gryllidae, and keep most of the current article as a sort of broad concept article. Colin M (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Why a "small article", how is "cricket" as broad concept limited in its scope, and who is proposing to do all this wrangling about what is included or excluded? cygnis insignis 04:32, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Less then resounding support then!! Thank you for your comments, but so far nobody has addressed my initial point concerning systemic bias (WP:GLOBAL) when saying that "cricket (insect)" means Gryllidae. A similar issue arose a couple of years ago, when some editors asserted that grasshopper, another 'good article', is synonymous with Caelifera: which was both scientifically and practically incorrect. This may seem to be fastidious and of course I am not suggesting that any systemic bias is deliberate, but false synonymy actually makes attempts attempts to improve WP's Global balance more difficult. I would be happy with Nessie and Colin M's suggestions, perhaps if:

• "Gryllidae" were replaced by Grylloidea (and I don't know of any suggestion that the latter is not monophyletic) in the taxobox and first sentence, making it a truly 'broad concept' article;
• possibly merging Grylloidea into the Phylogeny and taxonomy section here;
• and converting Gryllidae from a forwarding page to small separate article (containing the subfamilies here).

Any objections to the above? Roy Bateman (talk) 03:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

To clarify, anyone worried about 'forking' - I now propose relatively minor changes to "cricket" itself (upranking taxon, etc.) and converting "Gryllidae" from a forwarding page to a basic taxonomic link page (both are mostly of interest to entomologists). Roy Bateman (talk) 02:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I would not oppose this in principle, though I think it would require some care to make sure the content that's kept at Cricket still verifiably applies to Grylloidea rather than just Gryllidae. Also, I think you could go up one step to Gryllidea and still have only organisms that are known as some kind of 'cricket'. For example this book "Cricket Behavior and Neurobiology" (used as a source in this article) mentions "Florida mole crickets" (aka Gryllotalpinae), which are not part of Grylloidea. Colin M (talk) 20:15, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Cricket"

The usage of "Cricket" is under discussion, see Talk:Cricket (disambiguation)#Requested move 17 September 2019. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 22 August 2020

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: Not moved.(non-admin closure) Turnagra (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Cricket (insect) → Crickets in culture – An appropriate title perhaps, with interest in food and two meanings of the word "culture" :)? Further to the discussion of last year and the satisfactory (in my opinion) resolution of "Field cricket", I propose to split-off the taxobox and some of the biology in this article into a restored Gryllidae: as proposed (below) by Nessie. I primarily want to be sure that there are no serious objections to me doing this, appreciating that this would significantly reduce the size of what is considered a 'good article'.

From a taxonomic point of view the page is not good as it stands: placing the insect term "cricket" here at the family level has become increasingly obsolete and dysfunctional. The Phylogeny section needs updating, with yet another subfamily group removed - the Phalangopsinae are now in the restored family Phalangopsidae. In England "cricket (insect)" effectively means "Gryllidae", in Australia it seems to me that a species of cricket encountered in the bush is likely to belong to another family. I would suggest a sentence at the beginning of this page, along the lines of: "Crickets are insects most appropriately placed in the Orthopteran suborder Grylloidea, but can also include mole- and ant-crickets (infraorder Gryllidea). Roy Bateman (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose per the previous RM - this seems to be the same exact proposal unchanged as a year ago, to essentially move Cricket to Gryllidae. Cricket is the common name of this insect and few people know the Latin term, so no, in the same way that we have Cow rather than Bos taurus. SnowFire (talk) 16:20, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, we have "Cattle" instead of "Cow" or "Bos taurus", but yeah. Paintspot Infez (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Please understand the issue: at least "cow" redirects to an appropriate taxon. Roy Bateman (talk) 03:42, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. The proposed title makes the reader think this is about crickets in fiction when at least half of the article is real-word information about crickets. JIP | Talk 21:19, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per JIP. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose - This article is not about "crickets in culture". It is about the insects in the family Gryllidae, their description and biology, and has a section about their appearance in culture. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. How is this article about crickets in culture? -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose This page isn't even that relevant to "crickets in culture" but the insect popularly known as "cricket". Capitals00 (talk) 15:12, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose This page isn't even that relevant to "crickets in culture" but the insect popularly known as "cricket". Capitals00 (talk) 11:14, 29 August 2020 (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.