Talk:Roadkill
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Roadkill article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move 15 June 2026
edit
It has been proposed in this section that Roadkill be renamed and moved to Wildlife vehicle collision. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
Roadkill → Wildlife vehicle collision – "Roadkill" is the most common name, and vehicle collisions to animals are usually catastrophic to the animal, but they do not always kill the animal. I am looking at where to put information on rehabilitation for injured wildlife. For the state of Virginia in the United States, I have records of thousands of wild animals being hit by cars, then collected and brought into wildlife animal clinics for triage and sometimes rehabilitation. I think the best place for "wildlife collision" content is in this article, but it is currently called "roadkill", but that title best refers to animals who die on the road, and not to animals who have a collision which is not immediately fatal.
I have this 2025 review article for example which uses the term, "wildlife vehicle collision", and I think scientific articles generally use this term.
- Bíl, M.; Balčiauskas, L.; Bílová, M.; Cellina, S.; Favilli, F.; Gačić, D.; Guinard, E.; Heurich, M.; Ivanova, N.; Junghardt, J.; Keuling, O.; Kruuse, M.; Kukalaj, Q.; Langbein, J.; Laube, P.; Licoppe, A.; Masaryk, P.; Maślanko, W.; Mayer, M.; Moroney, A.; Moț, R.; Mrđenović, D.; Náhlik, A.; Nebunu, A.; Nezval, V.; Niemi, M.; Pokorny, B.; Psaralexi, M.; Ralevic, S.; Ricci, S.; Rolandsen, Ch.M.; Rosell, C.; Santos, S.M.; Seiler, A.; Steiner, W.; Swinnen, K.R.R.; Šprem, N.; Trajçe, A.; Trpeski, V.; van der Grift, E.A.; Vogiatzakis, I.; Zihmanis, I. (April 2025). "Wildlife-vehicle collision liability in Europe: A review of existing approaches and their implications". Journal of Environmental Management. 380: 124986. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.124986.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: article number as page number (link)
I think using that title would constructively broaden this article. I think "Roadkill" should still be listed as an alternative title. Thoughts from others? Bluerasberry (talk) 15:21, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- Comment: I think you mean Wildlife–vehicle collision (with a dash). No opinion on the merits. — BarrelProof (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- Strong Support. Wildlife vehicle collision (or wildlife-vehicle collision) seems like a more respectful term than roadkill, and would provide more space for research/science on the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naturedata (talk • contribs) 17:40, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- As suggested above, I think "wildlife-vehicle collision" would be the preferred syntax. Naturedata (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
- Support Wildlife–vehicle collision (with an ndash) per the above. Compare Deer–vehicle collisions. Tevildo (talk) 23:31, 15 June 2026 (UTC)