Eastern green mamba is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for
amphibians and
reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
"Their mortality rate, however, is high;" these words are mentioned in the end of the previous sentence, so I suggest they are removed from one or the other.
There are very few links throughout the lead. The lead should be linked when a word is (most of the time) linked in the article, although not too much.
The taxonomy section is very short, could be expanded like the western green mamba's, and the first four words in it are "The western green mamba", should be "The eastern green mamba".
Again, identification is not mentioned in the "Identification and Physical description section", should be removed.
In Physical description, what is "This", should be "The eastern green mamba"
Throughout the whole article, there are sections that have no links. In Scalation, words like
dorsal should be linked. In Physical description, words like
canthus and
maxilla should be linked. If people might not know what it is, it shoud be linked.
"Lifespan, longevity and aging" should be shortened to "lifespan"
the "Reproduction" section should be part of "Lifespan", not the other way around.
That's great to hear. I left the whole "Reproduction" section as the main, with the "lifespan" subsection to it. I just don't think it would be right to have it the other way around. Also, I really cannot expand further on the "Taxonomy" section mainly because the phylogenetic relationships of the genus Dendroaspis are still a bit of a mystery. They are distinct from other elapids, like cobras (Naja spp, coral snakes, Australian elapids, kraits and all other elapids). The fangs of the members of the genus Dendroaspis are longer, and their fangs are semi-hinged (sort of like vipers and pit-vipers who have fully hinged fangs while all other elapids have very fixed immovable fangs), their venom delivery apparatus is far more advanced, all the components of their venom are synargestic and work together to produce an extremely virulent effect (whereas other elapid venoms are not - they are "anti-complimentary", which means that there are components within their venom compisition that work against the lethal toxins in their venom), etc. I tend to believe that the mambas are most closely related to the
kraits and those of the genus
Pseudohaje. There are studies that do link the three genera, but nothing is conclusive. Mambas are truly unique and deadly. --
Dendro†NajaTalk to me!21:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)reply
In the
photo at the top of the article, the snake's mouth looks very strange – there is a gap at the side of the mouth but the front is closed. I've never seen a snake hold its mouth like that. Was that snake's photo taken in a fleeting moment of awkward mouth position, or is it a
venomoid specimen or injured or something of the sort? I suggest that this photo is a bit strange and should not be used. —
BarrelProof (
talk)
00:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected edit request on 14 October 2020
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The article uses both "behaviour" and "coloration" at different points. Please change "coloration" to "colouration" and make any other English-usage changes that you may find along the way.
64.203.186.69 (
talk)
13:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)reply