Talk:Neocaridina davidi

Recent move

I have reverted the recent move, as the new title was not supported by reliable sources. William Avery (talk) 11:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cherry shrimp. 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/20140222161844/http://www.crustahunter.com/en/deutsch-neocaridina-heteropoda-jetzt-neocaridina-davidi/ to http://www.crustahunter.com/en/deutsch-neocaridina-heteropoda-jetzt-neocaridina-davidi/

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: 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) 11:36, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: BIOL 412 HONORS

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2025 and 25 April 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): HNK2028 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Jonathand071, Tessa Marinello.

— Assignment last updated by Tessa Marinello (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Invitation for collaboration

Hello all —

I’m preparing a phased update of this article with the goals of:

• correcting long-standing taxonomic inconsistencies;
• replacing outdated or ambiguous statements with peer-reviewed sources;
• improving clarity for non-specialist readers; and
• tightening citation formatting (several references are currently duplicated, outdated, or inconsistently applied).

No live content has been overwritten. A full draft is available for review here:

User:Orange_Jones/sandbox/neocaridina-davidi

Feedback on scope, accuracy, and tone is very welcome before moving sections into the live article. In particular, expert eyes on the taxonomy section and the interpretation of synonymies (e.g., N. denticulata sinensis, N. heteropoda, N. zhangjiajiensis) would be especially helpful.

Pinging the following editors for visibility:

@William Avery

@HNK2028

@Tessa marinello

@EncycloPetey

@Plantdrew

Thank you in advance for any comments or corrections.

— Orange Jones ~2025-38388-74 (talk) 15:16, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

@Orange Jones:, the references in your sandbox aren't defined. It looks like many (all?) of them are used as references in the live version of this article. I very much doubt that the reference "Liang2002" supports the statement:

"N. davidi appeared under several different names, including Neocaridina denticulata sinensis and Neocaridina heteropoda. These names reflected regional populations or early attempts to classify the species, not distinct “types” of aquarium shrimp."

Liang was responsible for the name Neocaridina heteropoda, so wouldn't have noted it as a synonym of N. davidi. This article was originally titled cherry shrimp, and gave the species as N. heteropoda. There is perhaps something to be said about the history of this species in the aquarium trade and uncertainty of it's taxonomic identity (but perhaps references on this don't exist; I'm just reading this between the lines of the article history).

At any rate, could you fix the references in your sandbox so statements can be verified? I think your phrasing about the taxonomic situation is more accurate to reality over what is now in the article, but I don't it can be sourced to Liang. Plantdrew (talk) 02:45, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

@Plantdrew: Thank you for the thoughtful feedback — it was genuinely helpful. I’ve gone through the sandbox this morning and made the corrections you flagged:

• all references are now fully defined and linked to the statements they support,
• the taxonomic section has been revised to remove any implication that Liang (2002) treated *N. heteropoda* as a synonym of *N. davidi*, and
• synonymy is now attributed solely to later catalogues and database authorities (e.g., De Grave & Fransen 2011, WoRMS), as appropriate.

I appreciate your careful reading and the clarity of your comments. Please feel free to take another look if anything else stands out. Orange Jones (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2025 (UTC)