This   level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Amphibians and Reptiles High‑importance Toad 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Why is Toad in the category Frog? Weird. What about putting it in amphibian? 20:29, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree, and I must say, that I was totally baffled that this article says that toad is the common name for certain frogs. I always thought that frogs were different amphibians to frogs, with a longer life expectancy and being more intelligent than frogs. Vorbee ( talk) 17:51, 20 July 2017 (UTC) reply

<Tyler> Typically, a frog is any animal in the order Anura. There are two notions of toad: the taxonomic and the common usage. The taxonomic toad, or true toad, is any frog in the family Bufonidae. The common use of toad seems to be any frog that is not a treefrog and has bumpy skin or is largely terrestrial.

I reverted to the previous version, because the text does not belong in a biological article, but is part of the plot the above mentioned comedy. The removed text was inserted at the appropriate place within the text of the comedy. JoJan 08:11, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Frog has been nominated to be improved by WP:IDRIVE. Help us improve it and support Frog with your vote on WP:IDRIVE. -- Fenice 07:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC) reply

Should we rename this article to "true toad", as "Toad" is too broad of a term, and is used on many species of frogs. The term "true toad" is also used at the beginning of the article. -- liquidGhoul 15:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC) reply

The article really should come right out and make it clear; is it or is it not a kind of frog? CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 13:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, it is. Read the latest subject in Talk:Frog. Read the section on taxonomy in Frog. If you would like that repeated in this article, feel free, it is a wiki... -- liquidGhoul 14:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC) reply

Perhalps we could put something about how Agatha, from the Eragon universe, attempted to prove how 'toads' don't actually exist, just as some worthless trivia people can impress their friends with... Thunderflame ([[User talk:Thunderflame|talk]) 15:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC) reply

yes but no — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.158.114 ( talk) 21:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC) reply

I understand this is a sensitive issue to some, but when I searched "Bufonidae," this article came up. I would suggest a "toad" article (such as this one) that refers to "toads" in a general sense (including "false toads," such as narrow-mouthed toads and fire-bellied toads), along with a SEPARATE article for the "true toads," i.e. Bufonidae. Pstevendactylus 01:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Rename this article true toad and change Bufonidae to redirect there; let toad redirect to frog. Sound reasonable? Or we can have a separate article that says something like "this is not what you're looking for, look here or there". Sort of disambiguation in a smartass way. I prefer the former. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 11:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

The phrasing "true toad" is not used in common language, the only place I've seen it used is in taxonomic lists. If someone is looking for information they're not going to be looking for "true toad", they're just going to be looking for "toad". If they get redirected to frog, they're going to have that much further to hunt to get to the info they're looking for. I think it should stay as is, and that this article should discuss the differences between the families referred to toads, and perhaps why some of them are referred to as toads, as opposed to frogs. Having links to articles on the family and subfamily names is already done for many other animal groups and that wouldn't hurt either. - Dawson 14:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

While I don't exactly disagree with leaving things as they are, I'd just like to point out that everything should be crystal clear to the reader by the third paragraph of the intro to frog. - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 14:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Assuming someone would even read frog when that wasn't what they were looking for. Toad should remain a seperate article, and have a paragraph mentioning the same kind of thing at the top of it for clarity. As is, it kind of mentions it, but only vaguely. - Dawson 16:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC) reply

Pstevendactylus, I'm coming round to your view now. It would be good to have an article on "popular toads" separate from proper Bufonidae, if only to take advantage of the photos (see my recent edit summary). - Samsara ( talk • contribs) 19:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I agree also. If you search for toad, something similar to this comes up, and then a seperate one for the Bufonids (probably called "true toad"). -- liquidGhoul 07:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC) reply

There really needs to be two seperate atricles True Toad (ie. Bufonidae) and Toad (in general). It doesn't make sense having more than 1 family on this page, I mean just because Hylidae and Hyperoliidae are both tree frogs doesn't mean you put them on the same article.-- Tnarg^{1 2 3 4 5} 08:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Yeah I agree, there needs to be two articles. Froggydarb 08:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Seeing this article isn't just on Bufonidae, True toad should not redirect here neither should Bufonidae I will make a new article for True toad now and remove the redirects from true toad and bufonidae.-- Tnarg^{1 2 3 4 5} 11:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Use what used to be here, look at the history. -- liquidGhoul 12:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Problem solved. I've gone and made the True toad article, I just copied and rephrased relevant parts of this article. It's only a start and can be expaned.-- Tnarg^{1 2 3 4 5} 12:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC) reply

Yes, but do they give you warts?--Corinthian 13:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

That would be a no. -- liquidGhoul 14:05, 12 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Can you give a toad a wart? --Corinthian 14:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Papillomaviruses, which cause warts, are pretty species specific. It is highly unlikely you could give a toad a wart. :) -- Dawson 15:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC) reply

"Warts are caused by an internal viral infection. Therefore, it is impossible for warts to be caused by an external source, such as a toad." -- This description is really strange to me, especially the use of "internal" and "external". Ref to the article "wart" in wikipedia: "Warts are common, and are caused by a viral infection, specifically by the human papillomavirus (HPV) and are contagious when in contact with the skin of another." I suggest changing that to HPV-related explanation. Tomlee2060 ( talk) 01:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC) reply

I've marked this as a stub. Just look at the Frog article! I think we still needs loads more over here.-- 200.44.7.192 23:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC) reply

Frog is a featured article, so yes it is very good. But, this is still not a stub, as there is a decent amount of info. Also, in the future, could you use amphibian-stub instead of biology-stub. -- liquidGhoul 04:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC) reply

I have kissed a frog and a toad tons of times and have never had a wart! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.62.198.175 ( talk) 19:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC) reply

I was walking last week in the woods and I happened to come across what I'm pretty sure is a toad. Is there anywhere specific I could ask on wikipedia and find out exactly what type of toad it is (so the photos I took of it go in the right article)? Obviously I'd need to upload the images first, but I'm sort of unclear on that process as well... - Salur 23:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC) reply

The best places to ask would be the talk pages of WP:TOL and WP:AAR. -- liquidGhoul 23:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC) reply

> This article struck me as a stub as well. Where is the information on reproduction, habitat, diet, etc. that I think would be especially relevant in regard to articles on animals

This article has not much information and i need info! :( JuJu 5:25 PM — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.103.65.218 ( talk) 21:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC) reply

Is it a toad? or is it some moron editing wikipedia? along with imgonnakillaninja. it's all stupid

Removed. Unreferenced claims; Must be a hoax. JoJan 09:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC) reply

i have a project on toads and i can't find any info. focused on the whole concept of frogs gbdfgnthnergnenhenen

Should nt the type species Common toad be the one in the taxobox? Billlion ( talk) 14:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC) wik wiki wiki reply

"Toad refers to a number of species of amphibians or is commonly used to describe Jonathan Lobb. "

I am sure Mr. Lobb will regard this as libel. Best remove or rewrite it. 71.96.210.158 ( talk) 12:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC) reply

Is the reference to a book for further reading appropriate?-- Jcvamp ( talk) 13:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply

per Manual of Style, it shouldn't be in bold text, which I have removed, but otherwise don't see a problem with it. I don't know the work myself, but I'm assuming that it amplifies on the topic. -- Rodhull andemu 14:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC) reply

This bug I think is why the top left toad image is overlapped by text. I think the wiki text of the article is fine and some day when the bug is fixed the page will look right. Hope so. Toad has wart. :-) -- Rogerhc ( talk) 02:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC) reply

I know this is the wrong place but am trying to find out what they eat? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.107.192 ( talk) 02:35, 9 July 2010 (UTC) reply

A group of toads is called a "Knot."

A cladistic group or many toads in one place? 80.141.162.111 ( talk) 20:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Dr Chordate has a great song which describes some of the biological characteristics of toads. A video of a performance of that song can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLeGFdvHp1c&feature=related Enjoy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.209.9.250 ( talk) 15:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC) reply

This photo was placed in a gallery in the lede of the article by user Ajamalne. I am pretty sure there are wiki standards for gallery locations and such I am no longer current on, but I hope someone can move this photo to a more proper location. 45.37.108.163 ( talk) 05:53, 14 March 2019 (UTC) reply

The article currently states that "Toad is a common name for certain frogs, especially of the family Bufonidae...".

This makes sense if one takes frog to be synonymous with the term Anuran - but it makes no sense otherwise.

In common speech we make a distinction between frogs and toads; in taxonomy there is also a distinction. There are not only true toads (i.e. Bufonidae), but there are also other Anurans called toads which are neither true toads nor frogs.

I therefore think the first line of the article should be changed to "Toad is a common name for certain members of the order Anura, especially of the family Bufonidae...". There is no reason for frog to be synonymous with Anuran - it's actually more confusing that way.