This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Insects Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Utah Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Utah (assessed as Low-importance). Latter Day Saint movement Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement 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.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ah!!! That's what those were. I was ATV riding in Nevada this summer, and the dunes were COVERED with these guys. Everywhere you could see, these huge, big, fat black crickets marching along. Freaking weird insects, man. They make this shrill shreaking noise when they are scared, its really creepy at night with them. Cool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.7.128.51 ( talk • contribs)

Yes, they are quite disgusting. - 134.50.14.44 ( talk) 17:05, 29 June 2008 (UTC) reply

I searched for this species on Wikipedia because I saw the common name, was concerned that it could be insulting to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in an assignment for students I was double-checking, and wondered how Wikipedia dealt with it. My concern is not assuaged, although I think I'm going to leave the assignment as is. Do other people think that the presumptive demeaning etymology of the common name is reason enough to move this page to Anabrus simplex, with a redirect from Mormon cricket? Enuja 00:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC) reply

I think you're probably alone in your belief that the word "Mormon" here is used derogatorily. - 134.50.14.44 ( talk) 17:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC) reply

'Mormon' is only situationally derogatory. The issue is essentially that 'Mormon x' is a relatively well-established form; the Basin and Range region (a) has many unusual flora and fauna and (b) was only really settled in preference to nearby California and Oregon by the Mormons, making them the first European settlers to deal with them. On the other hand, Mormons lacked social cachet in the century during which most of these discoveries were made, so their names for local curiosities would have been rapidly superseded. I believe 'Mormon cricket' is a relict of the 'Mormon x' snowclone, like Mormon tea, which was, like the Mormon cricket, seen and noted as remarkable only by the Mormon settlers for longer than the public's outright hostility towards the Mormons lasted. The connection with the 'Miracle of the Doves' is probably folk etymology. I'm not confident enough about any of this to introduce it to the article, and if none of you have read this talk page in three years I doubt you're about to again, but I have nothing better to do, so. 70.173.153.6 ( talk) 23:22, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Please can someone confirm the accuracy of the photographs included in the article. It appears that the top two photographs are as described by the article, especially in body shape, however the lower three photographs look more like Parktown prawns in appearance and coloration. I do not think that all five photographs are of the same species of insect, however as I do not have an entomological degree I defer to others better equipped in this regard. Satur9 ( talk) 09:24, 29 April 2009 (UTC) reply

The differences are likely because of the startling changes in phenotype caused by swarming in insects, along with Basin and Range insects generally having extremely adaptive appearances. Swarming seems to require high visibility and survival in the scrub requires low visibility, which is where you get the difference in coloration and exoskeletal texture. If you look closely, you'll find the insects in all of the picture have very similar morphology in spite of extreme outward differences. 70.173.153.6 ( talk) 23:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Should the cm be in parenthises since the article is more likely to be viewed by an American, it being an American insect. Or, should the in be in parenthises, since cm is the official measurement worldwide? 76.125.53.9 ( talk) 22:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC) reply

If my mom dog eats them will it harm him? Grannyb52 ( talk) 13:57, 3 June 2023 (UTC) reply

The article says they are human edible and more sources agree [1] [2]. It is unlikely dogs would be poisoned but it is possible. Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:04, 3 June 2023 (UTC) reply