Talk:Titicaca frog

Titicaca frog
SoP. Frog from Titicaca? TeleComNasSprVen 21:29, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * No, Telmatobius culeus. Toss an American bullfrog into Lake Titicaca, it doesn't become a Titicaca frog.--Prosfilaes 23:04, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per above argument.--Dmol 23:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * That's a bit like saying "A Chinese toy with a "Made in China" tag in America is not American" to justify the inclusion of 'Chinese toy', or saying "If I shit in Australia, it doesn't automatically become 'Australian shit'." TeleComNasSprVen 23:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * It's a bit like saying that a fox that is red is not necessarily a red fox. It's a specific species, not any frog from the area.--Prosfilaes 04:47, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


 * This is one of several minimalist entries by the same anon user. They all need improving. I have improved this one, but have better things to do with my time. SemperBlotto 07:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * See Titicaca Water Frog. I don't know if it can be simply called a Titicaca without the word 'frog'. It could be sum of parts in that case. If not, it isn't sum of parts. By way of analogy, gets 13 500 hits, but it's sum of parts because of German Shepherd. We don't have a noun for Titicaca, so we must keep this until there is such a noun. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:40, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Prosfilaes (unless, as Mg notes, it's actually called a Titicaca, in which case delete).—msh210℠ on a public computer 14:12, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Prosfilaes unless it's frequently called a Titicaca. - -sche (discuss) 03:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. I think meets the CFI's attestation requirements, but it's not nearly so common as . —Ruakh TALK 21:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

kept -- Liliana • 17:04, 8 October 2011 (UTC)