Talk:Elephant/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Reference formatting

The reference citation for URLs is inconsistent. Would have fixed it but since only administrators are allowed, hope someone will improve the article. Shyamal 09:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

neurons in elephant brain

How much neurons is in elephant brain?

very plagiarized

pretty much the entire passage about elephants is plagiarized from another site, diagrams and all.

That is serious; I'd like to do something if I could. What site? What passage? Thanks, Iamunknown 19:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

A quick scan of a few selected passages shows only replication in wiki-mirrors. Any chance you could be more specific? Which passage? Which sites? Kuru ^talk 00:46, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

The article is groooowing

Should we start talking about a split? Maybe keeping the biology here and moving everything else (deities, environmentalism, etc.) into sub articles. Bendž|Ť 08:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Evolution

Mastodon mitochondrial DNA has now been mapped from a tooth. "Judging by the number of differences between the various genomes, researchers believe that African elephants diverged from Asian elephants and mammoths about 7.6 million years ago. And the latter two species appear to have split about 6.7 million years ago." (see here). Worth noting.--Wetman 07:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Gestation

Which animal has the longest gestation? Because at the beggining of the article it's said: The elephant's gestation period is 22 months, the longest of any land animal.

And in the reproduction section: Their gestation (pregnancy) period lasts about 22 months (630–660 days), the longest gestation period of any mammal.

So...which is the no-mammal and no land animal that has a gestation time longer?

Perhaps they are the animals with a longer gestation. Could it be?--UlisesRey 19:03, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Elephant speed - it's confusing in the article

In Legs and Feet: "Although they start this "run" at only 8 km/h,[28] elephants may reach 25 km/h, all the while using the same gait. At this speed most other four-legged creatures are well into a gallop, even with leg length accounted for. Spring-like kinetics may explain the difference between the motion of these and other animals.[29]"

But in Ears: "Walking at a normal pace an elephant covers about 3 to 6 km/h (2 to 4 mph) but they can reach 40 km/h (24 mph) at full speed."

I guess the 25Km/h mark sounds more reasonable and has a reliable resource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gustas (talk • contribs) 11:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Removing unsupported quotation

I am removing this paragraph from the article, because the info (the raping of rhinos) conveyed by Siebert's quotation is not supported by the original Pachyderm study mentioned as its source, and is disallowed by the study's author Stolow. (Arguably the word rape could be used in a more general sense of aggression and destruction, but that is not the most usual sense of the word.)

Charles Siebert reports in his New York Times article An Elephant Crackup? that:

Since the early 1990s, for example, young male elephants in Pilanesberg National Park and the Hluhluwe-Umfolozi Game Reserve in South Africa have been **raping and*** killing rhinoceroses; this abnormal behavior, according to a 2001 study in the journal Pachyderm, has been reported in ‘‘a number of reserves’’ in the region.

However, Rob Slotow, author of the cited article in Pachyderm, denies that any rape took place.DELETE TO HERE***

--HYC 11:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I recall reading this article. Since I don't think that elephants normally kill rhinos, it is interesting and is documented. Perhaps if the rape part, which I put between "**" and the refutation of it (the 2nd ph) were removed, the reference would still support the killing. As I recall this article was considering the breakdown of family units of elephants causing abnormal behavior, so that is relevent to the article.Bob98133 12:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Videos -- looking for feedback

How would the community respond to my adding the following external links: Short videos of elephants in their natural habitat: Taking a mud bath, Walking across the plains of Chobe National Park, Drinking from the banks of a river

The links lead to simple web pages with embedded flash videos and nothing else. I own these pages, my web site is stable and is not going away (it's much older then wikipedia itself). I researched contributing them as media to commons and including the media this way, (see my discussion with User talk: Robert Merkel), but it really seems to me that video in wikipedia/commons is just too immature. THe article he suggested as an example of video was Apollo 15 but in this case, the web browser links lead to some guys personal page on the commons (gmaxwell). Is that really better?

There is already precedent of a video link to some Ashram site that has a quicktime video of elephants.

Thanks. Isewell 15:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've added a Media section using the 'right way' - first time doing this - what does everyone think? am I doing it right? I used multi video template not video template because video template is ugly - messes up formatting of article. If this is a good thing I can work on contributing more of my videos in ogg format. Isewell 21:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate the video idea, but I am not totally sure if it's appropriate to show a video where at the end they are revving their engine to harass the elephants and laugh at the same time. :/ Sancassania 20:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Ganapati.jpg

Image:Ganapati.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 13:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Mice

Hi. I am a norwegian middle school student who is writing a paper about these beautiful animals. Lots of great info here, but I always heard that elephants are afraid of mice, but can't seem to find any onformation about it here. Does anyone know if it is true, or is it just a myth? In advance, thank you :) Kind Regards, -Anja —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.234.247 (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

My God, if you were a 3 m, 500 kg animal with tree trunk size feet scared of something a few cm's tall would you run away from that thing or just crush it. 128.227.127.149 03:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It has recently been discovered they are very frightened of bees; plenty of refs: [1] - MPF 16:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Mythbusters have just tested it and found it's Plausible - R'win (talk) 15:01, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Well bees, they sting, but that magical reference proves it, I just watched it on TV, they were definitely frightened by a little white mouse, I think this needs to be in the article.

If their skin is as sensitive and prone to irritation from insects as the article seems to indicate, then it would make sense that they would go out of their way to avoid bees. Anyway, i seem to recall hearing that because elephant's eyesight was fairly poor, they tend to be nervous of anything really small that's moving around because it might be a poisonous snake. If something like that gets underneath them, they try their damnedest to stomp it to death

Revrant (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC) I like these photos we should add them. http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/PhotoGallery/AsianElephants/ --Make No Name (talk) 20:58, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Effect on the environment

Did PETA write this article? There is a lot about extinction and stuff when it should mostly be about elephants themselves. Also the Effect on the environment section, I was surprised to see no mention of elephants being a pest to the environment, such as stripping trees and vegetation bare, killing too many trees and such. I have seen entire documentaries about how elephants can wreak havoc on their own environments, yet this section seems to be more bothered with talking about ants that enjoy their poo. JayKeaton (talk) 13:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

And I've read discussions of how that so-called 'destructive' behavior of elephants helps keep savannas open by rooting out intrusive trees (hinted at in Elephant#Effect on the environment). Without that behavior, much of the present-day savanna country of Africa would look quite different. It does not help to use pejorative terms about the natural behavior of animals, and eliminating that behavior (usually by eliminating the responsible animals) could profoundly change the environment. -- Donald Albury 14:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Completely agree that judgmental terms about animal behaviour are not useful, and that this section is poor. I'd like to make more changes (was worse before I made some), but I'm frankly intimidated by the elephant-hugging tone and can't put my hands on the necess refs.But elephants (like man) have a huge impact on their environment: whether this is positive or negative depends on the POV of the observer - ant or antelope - and the circumstances. "Maintaining savanna" in one area is "deforestation" in another. In Hwange National Park I've walked through miles of bush destroyed by elephants (severely reducing grazing for other animals) to find mud-holes dug by elephants (providing water for those same animals). We need to describe this neutrally, not privilege elephants above other species, and certainly not worship them! JackyR | Talk 18:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

We do need to find some reliable sources on the effect of Elephants on their environment. My point is that environments are shaped by many factors, including the foraging behavior of animals of all sizes. In general, animals and the environments they live in have evolved together, and, barring major disturbances, are relatively stable. The role of elephants in maintaining certain African environments may be analogous to the role of periodic fires in maintaining many forests and grasslands; elimination of elephants would likely produce major changes that we might find either desirable or undesirable, but which would certainly be hard to predict. -- Donald Albury 19:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

The environment is in no way stable in southern Africa - where did you get that idea? Over the last, say, 80 years, human populations have increased massively (typically 3-fold since only 1960), putting pressure on sheer acreage for habitation and food production. Urban, farming, national and veterinarian barriers have changed southern Africa from wildlife areas with some humans to human-controlled areas with occasional, disconnected, wildlife zones. (Large mammals used to have migration ranges of 100s of miles across what are now multiple sovereign states.) Human interventions in terms of water reservoirs for human/farming use, hunting to protect farming (of big predators to protect cattle, of elephants to protect crops/water pipes) and creation of wildlife reserves have also significantly changed the environment (some info here). Oh, and we can't be sure, but climate change seems to be having an impact on rainfall patterns and hence crop/forage growth. For elephants, which have almost no predators other than man, the main cause of early mortality used to be calf death due to drought. The creation of wildlife reserves with pumped water has allowed the elephant population to rocket in some areas to well above that which can be supported by the plant life (water is pumped very locally to create artificial water holes: there's not enough to water the whole forage area) .

I'm not sure why you're talking about "elimination of elephants". Was anyone suggesting it? Management of elephant populations, however, is critical to preserving environment alongside humans or within the artificial limits of a wildlife reserve (however massive). JackyR | Talk 22:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Certainly elephants have been culled off (that is killed because their numbers are too many and they became a pest), and it is the same with many other lovable animals, such as the kangaroo and whale (small joke on the whale one, please don't reply to it =P). But overall I feel like this article came straight from PETA.org instead of britannica.com JayKeaton (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed warning

Nothing serious really. But it needs to be sourced. There were a few bits that make me think it's not reliable - recognition of the African Pygmy Elephant as a distinct subspecies is not warranted, and that tribes etc were italicized. I'd trust it to be good pop-science grade, but that's not good enough. It might be good enough and thorough, but who can tell without sources? Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 22:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Your question on the status of the name Loxododonta fransennni has an answer (it was described in Schouteden, Henri (1914) "L’elephant nain du Lac Leopold II". Revue Zoologique Africaine) in Pygmy elephants of the congo, but since that is a forum we can't use it as a source. -- Donald Albury 03:01, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Sweeps - On hold

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

• There are three {{fact}} tags that need to be taken care of. I find the particular statements very interesting, but they won't be interesting if they can't be verified.
• There is a {{disputed-section}} tag under Family Classification. I do note the discussion of this above, but the issue needs to be resolved in order for this article to remain a GA. It doesn't sound too hard, just find some sources.
• The "Species" section is completely lacking in inline cites. They need to be added, especially for the likely-to-be-challenged material in the last paragraph.
• There's only one inline cite under "Asian Elephant."
• Inline cites are lacking under Trunk, Tusks, Teeth, Skin, Legs and feet, Ears, Diet, Senses, Social behavior, and Reproduction, calves, and calf rearing
• The "Effect on the environment" section should be converted into paragraph form and cited. (Willing to compromise on the paragraph idea but section definitely needs cites)
• Inline cites again are generally lacking under Humanity and elephants
• Formatting looks weird under "Religion and philosophy"
• I would suggest moving the entire "Elephants in culture" section into its own article (similar to Cultural depictions of lions and leaving a summary paragraph in this article rather than that long and cumbersome list.
• Again, inline cites are needed under Musth and Rogue Elephant

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards,Corvus coronoides _talk 23:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: I will be on vacation from December 21 to January 1. I'll check on the article again when I get back. Corvus coronoides _talk 22:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Delist

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of December 31, 2007, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR. Cheers, Corvus coronoides _talk 02:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Where is it detailed? It says below but I can't find anything on it. Dendodge (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Look in the GA Sweeps - On hold section just above. -- Donald Albury 14:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:EVM carried on elephant.jpg

Image:EVM carried on elephant.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Epic win

Kruger National Park has suffered from elephant overcrowding, at the expense of other species of wildlife within the reserve. [...] Without action, it is predicted that the elephant population in Kruger National Park will triple to 34,000 by 2020.40

The source actually says that, and appears to be relevant. I do wonder, though, if somebody added it with you-know-who in mind. The whole section needs a broader view of elephant national park issues though, right now it seems to be dealing only with South Africa. <eleland/talkedits> 17:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Fact bogus!

I am no expert, but who cares what is happening in that one particular park? Should we comment on all national park changes in elephant population. Honestly, I think it is irrelevant to the article and is a SCB reference point.—Preceding unsigned comment added by JordanCrawford (talk • contribs) -- Donald Albury 12:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Steve Hirano.jpg

Image:Steve Hirano.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:37, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

why is this LOCKED?

can someone answer me that question? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.238.90.15 (talk) 04:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Because of the constant stream of anonymous IP vandals, many of whom don't yet realize that that stupid Steve Colbert joke got so old too quickly.--Mr Fink (talk) 04:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Elephant Call

I work in an office with a TV that is on very low volume. During the day, when it is noisy I cannot hear any of the programmes that are on, but I *can* hear an advertisement for car insurance from a company called Elephant that makes use of an elephant call/noise throughout. I was wondering if anyone knew of any studies that prove that the human-audible elephant call has specifically evolved to carry long distances and be heard above general background noise, or whether this is just a technical aspect of the advertisement's audio track. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.114.226.175 (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

This really doesn't belong on this page, but I would note that TV commercials are notorious for jacking up the volume, and that any unusual features of elephant calls would likely be lost in the restricted bandwidth of broadcast television. Elephants do communicate sub-sonically, but your TV is not reproducing those frequencies. -- Donald Albury 13:09, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Steve Hirano.jpg

Image:Steve Hirano.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Elephants of Nepal

The a species of Elephants in Nepal is not mentioned, which shows unique features. http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/277113.jpg one bull is named Raja Gaj. Research is still being done on them.--Standforder (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Quick-failed Good Article nomination

According to the quick-fail criteria, any article that has cleanup or expansion banners (such as the ones currently in National parks and Family classification) must be failed immediately and does not require an in-depth review. Please remedy any issues brought up by such banners and remove them before choosing to renominate the article. Despite not requiring a detailed review, I will take this time to point out that the article far from meets the GA criteria in terms of the use of in-line citations. There are many large sections that lack even a single citation, and this is unacceptable. For good basic verification, facts must be attributed to particular sources, even if it's just a single cite at the end of each paragraph. If you have any more questions, feel free to contact me. If you feel this review was in error, you may seek a reassessment. Thank you for your work so far, VanTucky 22:56, 20 February 2008 (UTC)