View source for Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

The IP address or range 52.91.0.0/16 has been blocked by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):

The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider. To prevent abuse, web hosts may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.
You will not be able to edit Wikipedia using a web host provider because it hides your IP address, much like a proxy or VPN.
We recommend that you attempt to use another connection to edit. For example, if you use a proxy or VPN to connect to the internet, turn it off when editing Wikipedia. If you edit using a mobile connection, try using a Wi-Fi connection, and vice versa. If you are using a corporate internet connection, switch to a different Wi-Fi network. If you have a Wikipedia account, please log in.
If you do not have any other way to edit Wikipedia, you will need to request an IP block exemption.

How to appeal if you are confident that your connection does not use a web host's IP address:
If you are confident that you are not using a web host, you may appeal this block by adding the following text on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Caught by a web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is _______. Place any further information here. ~~~~}}. You must fill in the blank with your IP address for this block to be investigated. Your IP address can be determined here. Alternatively, if you wish to keep your IP address private you can use the unblock ticket request system. There are several reasons you might be editing using the IP address of a web host (such as if you are using VPN software or a business network); please use this method of appeal only if you think your IP address is in fact not a web host.

Administrators: The IP block exemption user right should only be applied to allow users to edit using web host in exceptional circumstances, and they should usually be directed to the functionaries team via email. If you intend to give the IPBE user right, a CheckUser needs to take a look at the account. This can be requested most easily at SPI Quick Checkuser Requests. Unblocking an IP or IP range with this template is highly discouraged without at least contacting the blocking administrator.

This block will expire on 07:31, 6 August 2027. Your current IP address is 52.91.53.51.

Even when blocked, you will usually still be able to edit your user talk page, as well as email administrators and other editors.

For information on how to proceed, please read the FAQ for blocked users and the guideline on block appeals. The guide to appealing blocks may also be helpful.

Other useful links: Blocking policy · Help:I have been blocked
This IP address range has been globally blocked.
This does not affect your ability to read Wikipedia pages.
Most people who see this message have done nothing wrong. Some kinds of blocks restrict editing from specific service providers or telecom companies in response to recent abuse or vandalism, and can sometimes affect other users who are unrelated to that abuse. Review the information below for assistance if you do not believe that you have done anything wrong.

This block affects editing on all Wikimedia wikis.
The IP address or range 52.91.0.0/16 has been globally blocked by ‪Jon Kolbert‬ for the following reason(s):

Open proxy/Webhost: See the help page if you are affected

This block will expire on 04:57, 27 November 2024. Your current IP address is 52.91.53.51.

Even while globally blocked, you will usually still be able to edit pages on Meta-Wiki.

If you believe you were blocked by mistake, you can find additional information and instructions in the No open proxies global policy. Otherwise, to discuss the block please post a request for review on Meta-Wiki. You could also send an email to the stewards VRT queue at stewards@wikimedia.org including all above details.

Other useful links: Global blocks · Help:I have been blocked

You can view and copy the source of this page:

{{User:MiszaBot/config 
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 2
|counter = 14
|algo = old(150d)
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-02-22/WikiProject report|writer=[[ User:Belugaboy|Belugaboy]]||
||day 2|month=February|year=2010}}
{{shortcut|WT:MAM|WT:MAMMAL}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|
{{WikiProject Mammals}}
}}
{{archives|auto=yes|search=yes|age=150}}

== Requested move at [[Talk:Ape#Requested move 2 August 2024]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Ape#Requested move 2 August 2024]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]] [[User_talk:UtherSRG|(talk)]] 19:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

== "Koala Bear" in Koala article ==

This post seeks consensus for the removal of the phrase ”sometimes called the koala bear” from the lead of the [[Koala]] article, or if not, it at least be qualified. My contention is that the phase is both erroneous and misleading.

I only registered as an editor on Wikipedia recently, joining on the 1st of August, although I have been editing informally for many years. One if the first things I noted was the use of “koala bear” in the Koala article. To somebody of my background as an Australian with an interest in wildlife, that is a complete nonsense.

Reading some of the history on the talk page it became obvious removing the term would be contentious, so I decided to try to introduce “erroneously” into the article as a compromise qualifier.  I left a note outlining my proposal and reasons on the talk page, and five days later, there being no response, added the word. It was immediately reverted, and surprisingly I was accused of vandalism. It was suggested that I seek consensus on this page and thus here I am.

I only ask you take the time to properly consider my arguments. I would prefer that the phrase “sometimes called the koala bear” be removed from the lead, but if not, it be at least qualified.

My arguments are as follows:

1.	The lead is not consistent with other articles in Wikipedia where similar issues arise.

An example is the article on the [[pronghorn]], where former common names such as pronghorn antelope are dealt with further down the lead and are qualified. Ironically, there is a far greater difference, both in appearance and in terms of taxonomy, between a koala and a bear, than there is between a pronghorn and an antelope.

2.	Given the other problems of the name, “koala bear” is not an important enough name to include in the first line of the article, nor is it necessary.

Wikipedia commonly offers alternative common names in the introduction to articles on animal species. This is useful in assisting the casual reader who may know the animal under another name to the accepted one. This is often done in guidebooks, for example “A Field Guide to the Mammals of Australia” (Menkhorst & Knight, 3d edition) where dama wallaby is offered as an alternative common name for tammar wallaby (page 116) however koala bear is not offered as an alternative common name for koala (page 86).  It seems very unlikely that a reader coming to the article looking for “koala bear” would be confused by the lead sentence only offering “koala” as a common name.

3.	The syntax of “koala bear” has the potential to mislead the casual reader as to the taxonomic status of the species.

In English language grammar, we place adjectives before a noun. Thus, we talk of a “big house” or a “blue dress”.  This is reflected in binomial English common names for members of the Animal Kingdom. “Sloth bear” refers to a bear that resembles a sloth, while “bear cuscus” refers to a cuscus that resembles a bear. This form of nomenclature is very well understood by the general public. “Koala bear” is unique (happy to be corrected) in that the adjective is placed after the noun, which at the least is confusing. That is, of course, unless you believe the koala to be a bear.

This leaves the potential for an uninformed reader to believe that koalas are a type of bear. [https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/facts/koala Koala, facts and photos (nationalgeographic.com)] appears to believe this to be a real issue as they bluntly start their article with "Koalas are not bears—they’re marsupials".
 
It has been argued that this problem with the name is discussed in the article. This is true; however, it is buried in the middle of a long and technically dense article. Many readers will only skim the introduction, an issue that is recognised in [[WP:LEAD]]. The problem is not helped by “koala bear” being highlighted in bold.

It has also been argued that the next sentence describes the koala as a marsupial. Again, it needs a certain level of education about animals to know that a bear cannot be a marsupial.

4.	“sometimes” in this context is a weasel word. 

The word “sometimes” in this context invites questions: who? where? when?  The statement “brown bears are sometimes called grizzly bears” is correct. But without qualification it is potentially misleading, because the species has never been called grizzly bears across most of its historical range. Better to qualify the statement, eg: “brown bears are sometimes called grizzly bears in America”. 

5.	Where is the reference?

After having some of my other edits deleted because of a lack of references, and learning how contentious this name is I was surprised that nobody had referenced “koala bear”, so I decided to give it a go.

Firstly, a reference for “koala” as a name: [https://australianmammals.org.au/publications/amtc-species-list AMTC Species List | The Australian Mammal Society Inc].

I did a search for “koala bear” on Bing (don’t ask). The first link was to Wikipedia, the next four were as follows:

[https://www.britannica.com/animal/koala Koala | Appearance, Diet, Habitat, & Facts | Britannica] (in lead) “Due to the animal’s superficial resemblance to a small bear, the koala is sometimes referred to, albeit erroneously, as the koala bear.”

[https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/facts/koala Koala, facts and photos (nationalgeographic.com)] (first line) “Koalas are not bears – they’re marsupials.”

[https://wwf.org.au/what-we-do/species/koala/ Koala - WWF-Australia | Koala | WWF Australia] (about halfway down the page) “You may have heard this iconic animal is also called the ‘koala bear’. Despite its endearing charm, this nickname can be very misleading. Koalas are marsupials and thus have no relation to bears.”

[https://australian.museum/learn/animals/mammals/koala/ Koala - The Australian Museum] No mention of “bear”.

It seems to me none of these sites could be used to reference the current lead sentence to the article. Yes, there were travel sites and personal sites further down that did use “koala bear” but nothing that could be described as “reliable” when talking about koalas.

The above references also support my original contention, that is using the term “koala bear” is both erroneous and misleading.
--[[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 03:33, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
:This again...? Well, admittedly the last merry-go-round was 4 years back. Please see [[Talk:Koala/Archive_1#Koala_bear_"inaccurate"]]. Setting aside the occasional incivility in that discussion (cough), the takeaway was something like a) the "bear" part is absolutely in use, if not frequently, and should thus be mentioned prominently; and b) whether to call this out as "erroneous" or "inaccurate" in the lede is open to discussion - which at this point seems to have come down to not doing so (the right choice, IMO). I suggest reading that section to find out what we have already been over. Given current coverage, I doubt the angle of claiming that the poor reader has to be protected from false bear-ness will carry much weight. --<span style="font-family:Courier">[[User:Elmidae|Elmidae]]</span> <small>([[User talk:Elmidae|talk]] · [[Special:contributions/Elmidae|contribs]])</small> 06:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you for giving me that link. The discussion certainly went places I would not want this to go. 
::As far as I could see, discussion came down largely to an argument between mostly Americans and mostly Australians. I'm not surprised, at my work the only people who call it a koala bear are American tourists. The most frequent question from them after "what is its name?" is "are they really bears?". 
::Please help me out here, the box at the top is some sort of summary or ruling? It reads ''The normal editing cycle can refine such indication but in the meantime, WP:NOCONSENSUS applies: In discussions of proposals to add, modify or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit. As near as can be determined, the "proposal to modify material" stems from this edit removing "inaccurately".'' Based on this should not "inaccurately" still be in the lead? Or was consensus sort to change that in the meantime.
::I wonder what the response would be if "Pronghorn" was edited to include "sometimes called pronghorn antelope" in the lead sentence? Actually, I think that article treats older, misleading names very well, and I would be more than happy if Koala was edited in a similar manner.  [[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 08:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
:::The word appears to have been removed almost exactly a year ago [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koala&diff=prev&oldid=1172851969], with - you are correct - none of the discussion that should have happened at that point. I would advise against simply changing it back now though, since a year of no objections for a heavily trafficked article does confer some weight of consensus (if a weak one). - WRT pronghorn, "koala bear" usage by the rough measure of Google hits is 10x more common in usage. At 4 million hits it is frankly at a level were it would be excessively prescriptive to omit it from the lede, I think. --<span style="font-family:Courier">[[User:Elmidae|Elmidae]]</span> <small>([[User talk:Elmidae|talk]] · [[Special:contributions/Elmidae|contribs]])</small> 13:40, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
:::If you're looking for an adjective ''misleadingly'' is probably better than ''erroneously'' or ''inaccurately''; vernacular names are not required to line up with formal taxons. To add to the examples already given the Barbary ape is a monkey, the ant-lion is an insect, she-oaks are not oaks, slippery elms are not elms, Russian thistles are not thistles, and Guinea chestnuts are not chestnuts. Koala bear may be on the way out (I used it 50 years ago; I don't use it now), but until it becomes an archaism it's worthy of inclusion. I suspect that ''koala bear'' persists more strongly with regards to plushes (from the influence of ''teddy bear''); the bear morpheme also carries over to ''drop bear''. Closer examples include marsupial lion, marsupial mole, marsupial mouse and marsupial shrew. [[Thylacine]] gives Tasmanian tiger and Tasmanian wolf as vernacular names. I think that article is fine without an adjective. [[User:Lavateraguy|Lavateraguy]] ([[User talk:Lavateraguy|talk]]) 19:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
::::''Misleadingly'' is fine by me. Happy to accept that. 
::::Regarding other cases, happy to accept there are many inconsistencies, however we are talking about the Koala article here not them. By the way, marsupial mouse in never used now, I have never heard of a marsupial shrew, and marsupial moles are never seen by anybody. The other examples are all extinct. [[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 12:47, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
: Wikipedia has to describe things reflecting the real world, not the world one wishes it to be. The koala is often called the koala bear and this is an easily established fact. No one argues it is a true bear, it is just a vernacular name that is widely used in the English language. There are many other cases, such as [[golden moles]], which are not true moles, and [[South American foxes]], e.g. Darwin's fox and Andean fox, which are not true foxes. With birds there are more examples, e.g. the European blackbird is a thrush rather than a blackbird and let's not touch warblers, babblers and finches. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 16:58, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
::You could have used American robin vs European robin vs Australian robins. Again, we are talking about the Koala page, so these are irrelevant. But most of your examples are maybe species in different genre, or at the most different Families. Koalas and bears are in different Infraclasses.
::Through my work we see any number of American tourists who call them "koala bears" (and are the only people who do). I don't know if anyone agues it, but a good proportion of them believe that koalas are bears. Australia is an expensive destination for Americans and most who visit are well-off and I would have thought well-educated. It leaves me wondering what people in less educated sectors of the community think. Your statement "No one argues it is a true bear" is just a guess. [[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 13:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
:::Maybe we could add "sometimes called the koala bear for its resemblance to a bear" to give a hint, using the phrase that is used later in the article. But that would make the first sentence longer and more difficult to read (and we already say it's a marsupial anyways), so I'm not totally sure I really like that option. However, this phrase would be more cautious than simply saying "erroneous" or "misleading"; whether or not it is misleading really depends on how one interprets that name, and we should not give the impression that the name "koala bear" should not be used anymore by indifferently labelling it as "misleading" or similar. [[User:Jens Lallensack|Jens Lallensack]] ([[User talk:Jens Lallensack|talk]]) 21:38, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
::::Maybe we could state "...sometimes inaccurately referred to as a Koala bear", which would be correct. [[Special:Contributions/14.2.206.29|14.2.206.29]] ([[User talk:14.2.206.29|talk]]) 01:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::Asked and answered. No. - [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]] [[User_talk:UtherSRG|(talk)]] 02:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
::::::Actually, if you read [[Talk:Koala/Archive_1#Koala_bear_"inaccurate"]] the question was asked and the answer was yes, and "inaccurately" was inserted. Then a year ago it was removed without discussion or consensus. [[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 03:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
:::::I totally agree with you. The current lead is so inaccurate.  [[User:Corythaeola|Corythaeola]] ([[User talk:Corythaeola|talk]]) 02:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

== Merge [[Chestnut-striped opossum]] into [[Northern three-striped opossum]]? ==

I don't know much about mammals so apologies if I'm off the mark here. The IUCN[https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/96866849/197321762] and MDD[https://www.mammaldiversity.org/taxon/1000063] both seem to regard the [[chestnut-striped opossum]] (''Monodelphis rubida'') as a synonym of the [[northern three-striped opossum]] (''Monodelphis americana'') - should the former be merged into the latter? Cheers, [[User:Ethmostigmus|Ethmostigmus]] 🌿 ([[User talk:Ethmostigmus|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ethmostigmus|contribs]])  05:56, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
: It was recognised by the IUCN and MSW3, and subsequently by aggregator sites (e.g. ITIS, GBIF, COL), which is why it has a page. The archive of the [2008 IUCN assessment] shows how little was known about this animal. The IUCN cites  the phylogenetic study of [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263897150_Molecular_phylogeny_of_short-tailed_opossums_Didelphidae_Monodelphis_Taxonomic_implications_and_tests_of_evolutionary_hypotheses Pavan et al (2014)] for its inclusion in ''Monodelphis americana'' and the MDD cites their follow-up classification ([http://digitallibrary.amnh.org/handle/2246/6692 Pavan & Voss, 2016]).  As the IUCN and MDD both support the synonymy I'd support the merge in principle. We have the odd situation where the target article is more of a stub than the one being merged, so perhaps the merge should also involve expanding the target article to at least the same level. &nbsp;—&nbsp;<span style="white-space: nowrap;font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;"> [[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]  &#124;[[User talk:Jts1882| talk]]&nbsp;</span> 07:04, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
:We do not need to support articles for no longer valid species. I just redirected 3-4 opossum articles to the species they are now considered to be a part of. (See the history of ''[[Monodelphis]]'' for the redirected articles.) I support merging any relevant data. - [[User:UtherSRG|UtherSRG]] [[User_talk:UtherSRG|(talk)]] 12:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

== Requested move at [[Talk:Moggy#Requested move 4 September 2024]] ==
[[File:Information.svg|30px|left]] There is a requested move discussion at [[Talk:Moggy#Requested move 4 September 2024]] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. [[User_talk:Asukite|<span style="color:Purple;font-size:medium;font-family:Bradley Hand ITC"> ASUKITE</span>]] 16:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

== Merge [[Dorothy's slender opossum]] into [[White-bellied slender opossum]]? ==

Hello again! I've found another article for an opossum species that appears to be reduced to synonymy. The IUCN[https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/40508/197313291] and MDD[https://www.mammaldiversity.org/taxon/1000117] both seem to regard [[Dorothy's slender opossum]] (''Marmosops dorothea'') as a synonym of the [[white-bellied slender opossum]] (''Marmosops noctivagus'') - would anyone be willing to perform the merge? Cheers, [[User:Ethmostigmus|Ethmostigmus]] 🌿 ([[User talk:Ethmostigmus|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ethmostigmus|contribs]]) 02:51, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
:Done (there was only a half-sentence difference between the articles). This was pretty easy and straightforward, but as a reminder, the stated rules of this project are that articles should follow whatever MSW3 says, unless MDD and IUCN agree about a change. I know that it's a very very large area so it's not always followed, but this article has had a note that it may not be a legitimate species for 20 years, and the IUCN has agreed for at least 5 (and probably much more), so feel free to merge similar articles as you see fit. --'''[[User:PresN|<span style="color:green">Pres</span>]][[User talk:PresN|<span style="color:blue">N</span>]]''' 03:26, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for the merge, and for the explanation! Mammals are pretty far out of my wheelhouse so I'm a little nervous making changes like this without seeking input from more experienced editors, but now that I know MDD+IUCN consensus is generally enough to override MSW3 I feel much more comfortable being bold :) [[User:Ethmostigmus|Ethmostigmus]] 🌿 ([[User talk:Ethmostigmus|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Ethmostigmus|contribs]]) 08:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

== Merge of [[List of manids]] ==
See [[Talk:List_of_manids#Merge_to_Manidae]]; some input would be welcome. --<span style="font-family:Courier">[[User:Elmidae|Elmidae]]</span> <small>([[User talk:Elmidae|talk]] · [[Special:contributions/Elmidae|contribs]])</small> 06:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):

User:MiszaBot/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Mammals (edit)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects (edit)
Template:Archive list (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Archives (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:HasTemplate (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:If empty (view source) (protected)
Template:No redirect (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Plainlist/styles.css (view source) (protected)
Template:Portal (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Shortcut (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Talk header/archivebotparse (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Talk other (view source) (protected)
Template:Template parameter value (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Th/abp (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:Tmbox (view source) (protected)
Template:Tmpv (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:WikiProject Mammals (view source) (template editor protected)
Template:WikiProject banner shell (view source) (template editor protected)
Category:Project-Class mammal articles (edit)
Module:Archive list (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Arguments (view source) (protected)
Module:Banner shell (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Banner shell/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Banner shell/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Check for unknown parameters (view source) (protected)
Module:If empty (view source) (protected)
Module:InfoboxImage (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:List (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/configuration (view source) (protected)
Module:Message box/tmbox.css (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/config (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/rfd (view source) (protected)
Module:Pagetype/softredirect (view source) (protected)
Module:Portal (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/images/m (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Portal/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Redirect (view source) (protected)
Module:Shortcut (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Shortcut/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Shortcut/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:String (view source) (protected)
Module:TableTools (view source) (protected)
Module:Template parameter value (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:WikiProject banner (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:WikiProject banner/config (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:WikiProject banner/styles.css (view source) (template editor protected)
Module:Wikitext Parsing (view source) (protected)
Module:Yesno (view source) (protected)

Return to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mammals.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Mammals"