Talk:Neusticomys

Any differences among fish-eating rats?

These articles all mention the fact that these are rodents, and a few say they're semiaquatic. I assumed they all eat fish, until I read the one semi-detailed article, which says they (at least these ones) don't. Aside from who they're named after and where they're found, is there anything setting any of these rats apart from each other? If so, that info would be very useful. As it is, it seems like this is one species that lives in different neighbourhoods. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you referring to the different species of Neusticomys? They apparently differ in some morphological details, like the color of the feet and whispers, length of the whispers, and some features of skull and tooth morphology. Obviously these articles could be expanded greatly, but that's the case for most species articles that were automatically generated a few years ago. Even so, you'll probably find little information on diet and ecology: N. monticolus is the best-known species, and as you can see even it is quite poorly known. Ucucha (talk) 08:53, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

With such small differences and such stubby articles, might it make more sense to merge them all into one article for the genus, containing a list of species (with relevant notes)? Or put the five less-known species in a "Related Species" list in the Montane rat article? I imagine there is probably a broader "one article per species" Wikiproject consensus, and I'll look into that. But it seems a bit strange in cases like these, where a reader could learn about all six species at once, instead of clicking six links. Not a huge problem, just putting the idea out there. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2013 (UTC)