Talk:Snakes of Nigeria

	Snakes of Nigeria 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nigeria Low‑importance

	Nigeria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nigeria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nigeria 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.NigeriaWikipedia:WikiProject NigeriaTemplate:WikiProject NigeriaNigeria articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Current article state[edit]

first off - don't try to pull rank please; no one here is going to leave any article alone because another editor claims that they know all about it and are the sole arbiter of correctness on that topic (I'm a zoologist as well, BTW). That is not how Wikipedia operates. Let's try to do this cooperatively.
second - the large majority of edits I made in this article were to correct grammar and formatting, and reduce wordiness. Blanket reverts of all that because you disagree with individual points of fact are counterproductive; please don't do it.
third - can you specify what exactly you object to?
- The current lede says exactly the same thing about the two endemic species (Gonionotophis egbensis, Tricheilostoma greenwelli) as the previous one; and the former is in a genus known as file snakes, the latter in a subfamily known as threadsnakes.
- In the main text body, I have similarly retained what information is a) suitable (we don't really need summaries of Colubridae characteristics here - that's what wikilinks are for) and b) verifiable from the sources given.
- I have also removed references that were unsuitable (we don't use Youtube links as references except in very specific circumstances) or overly broad (there's no need for links to generic encyclopedias for generic info that can just be wikilinked within the project).

So, what material specifically do you think is incorrect in this version? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:31, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]