Talk:Panthera pardus tulliana

The Persian leopard and Anatolian leopard are not the same thing.

The article starts with "Panthera pardus tulliana is the Persian leopard or Anatolian leopard". I think this is inaccurate as the Persian leopard and Anatolian leopard are not synonyms for the same population. One is from the Iran region and the other from Anatolia, but both belong to the same subspecies as defined now. Perhaps something along the lines:

Panthera pardus tulliana is a leopard subspecies with a historical distribution in the Caucasus, Southern Russia, Iran, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Turkey. In the past several subspecies were described for leopards within this range, including Panthera pardus saxicolor in Iran (the Persian leopard), with Panthera pardus tulliana restricted to leopards in Turkey (the Anatolian leopard).

It's difficult to get the necessary precision without getting too wordy, so I think it best discussed here before making changes. The above makes the point, but the wording can certainly be improved upon. It took a while to get agreement on the phrasing for the former tiger subspecies. —  Jts1882 | talk  14:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Firstly I don't know if they are they same or not, but please don't put another Latin name in the text to confuse non-expert readers like me. Secondly as we know from DNA analysis that at least one Persian leopard lived in Turkey don't you think it is likely that Persian leopards are breeding with Anatolian leopards rather than being two separate populations? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I suggest the following definition: .. is a leopard subspecies in the region encompassing Anatolia, the Caucasus and Iranian Plateau With this focus on ecosystems, we don't need to list the countries in the lede. What do you think? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:17, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Not entirely accurate, as populations in Southern Russia and southwestern Iran are excluded. Ddum5347 (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I like the idea of ecoregions rather than countries. How about .. is a leopard subspecies in parts of Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Iranian Plateau, and some surrounding areas? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:35, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Re Anatolia : I think we don't even have to write .. parts of .., as this is apparently a recent i.e. 20th century phenomenon that the pop in Turkey declined to "parts of". Still in the 1950s-60s, more localities were known than today. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Either way, because of geography, Anatolia is synonymous with Turkey. Ddum5347 (talk) 22:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be filled up with opinions, but little knowledge. And obviously did not even bother to read about Anatolia. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

What other countries are on Anatolia? Please, enlighten us. Ddum5347 (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Still too general. We need to either formally define all the regions it is native to or use countries. Ddum5347 (talk) 17:57, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Last time i looked, southern Russia and Dagestan were still part of the Caucasus. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah but the Iranian plateau does not cover all of Iran. So that's an issue Ddum5347 (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Most of the population of this subspecies of leopard live inside the borders of Iran (almost %70), also this subspecies is the apex predator of Iran's wildlife, the name Persian leopard is a good choice for this title. KuroshM (talk) 15:48, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

I think it would lead to time wasting arguments but if you wish to formally propose the article be renamed please create a new section on this talk page so that editors don”t need to read through all the above Chidgk1 (talk) 15:55, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Map does not quite match text

Maybe it needs amending? Please see my comment at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Leopard-tulliana-range.png Chidgk1 (talk) 06:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey @Chidgk1: you may have seen the recent repeated additions re the cat images in Sarı et al. (2020). What do you think and know about these claims? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:09, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

No I had not seen that. Sorry I am just a layperson and don't have any more info or knowledge than what is in the study. I wish the govt here would fund more study - perhaps in conjunction with studying other wildlife - after all camera traps and DNA sequencing must be very cheap nowadays. And citizen science volunteers might be keen to get out into the countryside once we are free to move around again - maybe next year - so I guess only a few professional scientists would be needed. This could be tied in with reforestation efforts - maybe to figure out where best to try and make or preserve wildlife corridors as I think I cited. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:32, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Who wrote this article in the Turkish newspaper that has been ref'ed? And what is the content + arguments for the claim that the photos in Sari et al. (2020) do NOT show a leopard?? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:36, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Which newspaper and claim are you referring to please? Chidgk1 (talk) 07:41, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

See this http://www.tramem.org/memeliler/?fsx=2fsdl4@d&detay=904&sxc=&dfx=7699226089755&g=3 that has been added several times. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:47, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

I liked your shortening, and only revised to singular. When subspecies is meant, the singular is more appropriate; lets use the plural form in regards to *several individuals* of this subspecies. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Is tramem.org a reliable source?

Re above I had not seen that website before but it seems to be a forum for sharing and discussing photos of wild mammals, not a newspaper. I will ask on Turkish Wikipedia whether anyone thinks it is a reliable source or not and if I get an answer I will feedback here. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Super! I meanwhile removed the link to this website + revised the phrasing re the photo in Sari et al. (2020). -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:38, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

I had a look at this link again and saw the responses by Mallon and Breitenmoser. But since this is a blog, I think it's not usable; see Wikipedia:Blogs as sources. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Subspecies changing

@LPFCW: what is your source for changing it to saxicolor? The most recent taxonomic analysis confirm it is tulliana. And why are you changing the order of the countries? It isn't important. Ddum5347 (talk) 00:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ddum5347: My source is the genetic studies done by various researchers. For instance, please see:

• Miththapala, S.; Seidensticker, J.; O'Brien, S. J. (1996). "Phylogeographic Subspecies Recognition in Leopards (P. pardus): Molecular Genetic Variation". Conservation Biology. 10 (4): 1115–1132. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10041115.x."
• "Uphyrkina, O.; Johnson, E.W.; Quigley, H.; Miquelle, D.; Marker, L.; Bush, M.; O'Brien, S. J. (2001). "Phylogenetics, genome diversity and origin of modern leopard, Panthera pardus" (PDF). Molecular Ecology. 10 (11): 2617–2633. doi:10.1046/j.0962-1083.2001.01350.x. PMID 11883877. S2CID 304770.".
• Farhadina, M. S.; Farahmand, H.; Gavashelishvili, A.; Kaboli, M.; Karami, M.; Khalili, B.; Montazamy, Sh. (2015). "Molecular and craniological analysis of leopard, Panthera pardus (Carnivora: Felidae) in Iran: support for a monophyletic clade in western Asia". Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 114 (4): 721–736. doi:10.1111/bij.12473.

And much of scientific papers in high ranking journals that all refer to the subspecies in this region as the Persian leopard.

Would you please let me know what is your source to change the entire page name under the name of the Anatolian L.? --LPFCW (talk) 00:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)LPFCW

This source is both more recent than all the sources you linked, and uses P. p. tulliana. The reason the pages were merged is because they are the same subspecies.

• Kitchener, A. C.; Breitenmoser-Würsten, C.; Eizirik, E.; Gentry, A.; Werdelin, L.; Wilting, A.; Yamaguchi, N.; Abramov, A. V.; Christiansen, P.; Driscoll, C.; Duckworth, J. W.; Johnson, W.; Luo, S.-J.; Meijaard, E.; O’Donoghue, P.; Sanderson, J.; Seymour, K.; Bruford, M.; Groves, C.; Hoffmann, M.; Nowell, K.; Timmons, Z.; Tobe, S. (2017). "A revised taxonomy of the Felidae: The final report of the Cat Classification Task Force of the IUCN Cat Specialist Group" (PDF). Cat News (Special Issue 11): 73–75.

Now please stop WP:EDITWAR edit warring and perform constructive edits to this page. Ddum5347 (talk) 00:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ddum5347: I knew what is your reference. This is not considered as a reference! Because, Newsletter cannot be considered as a reference! This is only a newsletter and as a scientist I know they publish only what they politically like! So a scientist won't publish a genetic study to a newsletter! You understand that?! --LPFCW (talk) 01:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)LPFCW

@Ddum5347:So now that you know this is not a reference, particularly comparing to those I sent you above, Please change the page title to Persian leopard! If not, do not merge the pages. Let it be as it was previously! And you should know it is not only me who keep editing this page. Many Many others will do the same. Because this page has distorted the real name of the subspecies! So it won't stop until then!--LPFCW (talk) 01:16, 7 April 2021 (UTC)LPFCW

I sincerely hope you're joking. Ddum5347 (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jpgordon:@Nick Moyes:@Donald Albury: This guy keeps edit warring and replacing a valid subspecies name on this page. I have done the best I can to fix the page without reverting. I leave this to your hands, his edit history and talk page speaks for itself. Ddum5347 (talk) 01:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@LPFCW: Unless there is a widely accepted taxonomic study that names this subspecies as P. p. saxicolor, that "newsletter" you so disdain is considered the standard reference for specific and subspecific statuses here on Wikipedia. Please halt your editing and engage in discussion here before this devolves into an edit war for which you may be blocked. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 02:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@SilverTiger12: These studies I mentioned above have proper methodology in scientific journals! Why should you use a newsletter?! Do you mean Wikipedia is spreading distorted information and that is fine to everyone of you guys!

@Ddum5347:@Jpgordon:@Nick Moyes:@Donald Albury: If you are not a scientist or you are not aware of a fact, why do you do such changes in a page that was there for so long in peace with no problem?! By the way, Iranians in all over the world know how you type of guys keep distorting the information in internet and I am personally very tired of such habits of yours. (For example the Persian Gulf name which a person from Britain came as a guest to the region and then put fire among neighboring nations by changing a historical name)! If you think you will lock down my ID and IP and that is the end of this page, you should know that you can not lock down everyone in various countries forever! This is already an edit war unless this page goes back to its previous form of the Persian leopard page!

This is not a censorship or nationalistic issue. The source we use is the most recent assessment of felid taxonomy there is. There is no bias meant with this. And you have just admitted to edit-warring. Count your hours left for editing. Ddum5347 (talk) 02:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ddum5347: I admit you have wasted much of my time by your fault! But, that is not A SCIENTIFIC PAPER! If this is not a censorship or nationalistic issue, why you do not use a scientific paper with methodology?! By the way, the reason that tulliana is still up there in the title is because my IT people will join me tomorrow to fix this issue on this page!

Good luck with that. You'll most likely get banned when the admins see what you've done. Ddum5347 (talk) 02:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

That is fine if the admins see that you have done distorting scientific information with questionable purposes?!. If you are not distorting the information, why didn't you just change the saxicolor to tulliana according to your newsletter reference? Why did you change the Persian leopard in the title?!!!

Like I said NUMEROUS times, the two articles were merged since they are the same subspecies. And we specifically removed Anatolian and Persian adjectives from the page itself to prevent nationalistic people like you from getting upset over the split. I wasn't the one who changed it. Ddum5347 (talk) 02:57, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

The merging of the former separate pages on Anatolian leopard and Persian leopard was discussed between Dec 2020 and March this year, see Talk:Persian_leopard#Merger_proposal_2. It was unanimously decided to merge the 2 pages under the title of the Latin name. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this was backed by a consensus to use the IUCN specialist group assessment of the taxonomy for the taxonomy of Felids. It is a good source because it is a review of the primary taxonomic and phylogenetic literature. This makes it a secondary source for Wikipedia's purposes and Wikipedia policy favours secondary sources (WP:SECONDARY) over primary sources (WP:PRIMARY); the latter are discouraged and rigorously removed in some subject areas (e.g. medical). The sources listed by LPFCW are all primary sources (and mostly rather dated) so unsuitable for decisions on page name etc. The most recent (2015) predates the IUCN taxonomy revision and uses the traditional subspecies for Persian leopards. The conclusion that they form a monophyletic clade is not inconsistent within them being part of a subspecies with larger range (unless you are wedded to the PSC). —  Jts1882 | talk  11:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

• As I was pinged here, I'll simply observe that the right actions appear to have been taken. A disruptive and clearly belligerent editor has been blocked, and this page has been semi-protected for a while. I, or another admin, will gladly extend that protection if disruption continues, though we prefer not to have pages protected if we can avoid it. IP's are welcome to contribute if they follow our policies and guidelines, and learn to contribute collaboratively and don't [[WP::EDITWAR|:EDITWAR]]. Should new sources, or new ways of interpreting sources come to light, they should be discussed here in reasonable manner, and not with threats of further disruption. I particularly congratulate Ddum5347 for their self-control in dealing with this disruption, although it is heart-warming to know so many people care so strongly about taxonomy. To dismiss a major specialist group's means of communication of the 2017 review and revision of the taxonomy of the Felidae as a mere "newsletter" (despite their paper's name) is quite an insult to the Cat Specialist Group, a component of the Species Survival Commission SSC of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). I note they intend to review the Felidae every five years. Whilst many people prefer using so-called 'Common names' of animals and plants, this is a good case in point where the proper use of scientific names and modern taxonomic studies is essential to avoid confusion and, just as importantly, nationalist fervour or outdated taxonomic perspectives. I would however observe that it seems appropriate to use a bold font to highlight the first use of the two 'common names' in the article, and I would have expected a little more of this in the lead, now that the two former articles WP:REDIRECT here, post their merge. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:29, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, the common names should be mentioned and they were. They were omitted because they became a cause of contention with editors changing the order and arguing over the correct name. It needs something like "this subspecies is variously known as the Persian leopard or Anatolian leopard in different parts of its range", which is a bit wordy. —  Jts1882 | talk  13:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Am working on it: trying to find out who first coined the names. Probably Pocock, but will have to read his writings on leopards first. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't Pocock who coined the names: in his 1930 article, he used 'Persian panthers' and referred to the leopard in Turkey as 'leopards in Asia Minor'. The term 'Asia Minor leopard' was used until at least the early 1970s. So it looks like Ullrich & Riffel (1993) might have been among the firsts who used the name Anatolian leopard. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Protected?

Hey Chidgk1 : do you know whether the leopard is protected by law in Turkey meanwhile? In the 1970s, it was not. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes it is but I am not sure when that started. Possibly 1999 with joining CETS. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/bigcats/turkey.php Chidgk1 (talk) 09:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I checked Can (2004) who wrote that the Central Hunting Commission protected brown bear and striped hyaena in 2004, but he did not refer to the protection status of the leopard. Only that hunting large carnivores is prohibited in state-owned land. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

But surely joining the "Council of Europe’s Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats" means they were protected from 1999, if not before. Doesn't it? Surely that means it cannot be hunted anywhere, even in unprotected areas? I could write "Turkey enforced the Berne Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats from 1999, which protected the species by law."? By the way that article says it also applies to Azerbaijan. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:45, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmm, I was surprised myself that Can (2004) did not write anything about protection status of the leopard in Turkey, nor referred to the Berne Convention. But since according to him, it is forbidden to kill it INside protected areas, it seems NOT to be protected OUTside such state-owned areas. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Signing a convention and enforcing it are 2 different pairs of shoes : Can (2004) also commented on the muddle of responsibilities of different ministries, departments and commissions in regard to wildlife protection in Turkey. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:15, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes from the convention article it seems it was ratified back in 1984. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The section titled Threats is not the appropriate one for adding protection status. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

OK so is the protection status different in different countries? If not then feel free to move the sentence I wrote to whichever general section you think e.g. "conservation" and make it general e.g. "Hunting is banned in all the countries.". But if it is different in different countries (maybe due to different laws) then it should probably be in the country sections don't you think? Chidgk1 (talk) 16:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes to your 1st question : the protection level differs between countries. And no to your 2nd question : the title of this section is "Distribution and habitat", so protection level is usually part of the section "Conservation" in other pages on animals. And that is listed in the Berne Convention Annex 2 does not refer to Turkey alone, but to all countries that ratified this convention. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The protection status of animals present in a country is usually stated in a National Red List or Red Book. Does such a Red List exist for mammals in Turkey, published after 2004? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I have not managed to find anything yet only https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10784-020-09498-0 which I will cite in Wildlife of Turkey. If I find a list I will add it to that article. Meanwhile I will leave you to do as you think best here. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the link : sounds like an interesting article. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 06:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

New record

Hey Chidgk1 : a Turkish friend just sent me this link : https://www.sozcu.com.tr/hayatim/yasam-haberleri/yok-oldugu-saniliyordu-sirnakta-goruldu/amp/. Would you like to translate some content about the where and when to main page? I suppose, a scientific article may be published soon, then we can change the ref. Cheers -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Just found that it was published already and will add ref asap. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

yes https://doi.org/10.1080/09397140.2021.1924419 but you have to pay Chidgk1 (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

unfortunately, since Kasparek sold the journal, it has become more expensive. But I think, the authors are allowed to upload it to researchgate after some time. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC) But you can contact them by email and ask for a pdf for personal use!! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Persian leopard in Pakistan ?

We have 2 issues here:

• a scientist who collected 33 hair samples of leopards that originated in Afghanistan and Iran, conducted a phylogenetic analysis of these samples and concluded that the leopards in the western part of the country belong to the saxicolor subspecies, but to fuscus in the eastern part (Manati 2012).
• a newspaper article claiming that 2 leopards filmed in Pakistan are Persian leopards, but withOUT any such analysis. In contrast, several Pakistani wildlife scientists refrained from assuming a subspecific status of leopards in other regions of Pakistan, e.g. Kabir et al. (2013); Shehzad et al. (2014, 2015), Akrim et al. (2018).

Therefore, imo, we shouldn't rely on a newspaper article re assigning subspecific and population status in Pakistan. @Jts1882 and Chidgk1: please comment. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry no idea Chidgk1 (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

It's two newspaper reports, both attributing the identification to someone at the Balochistan Wild Life Department ("Chief Conservative Officer Sharif-ud-Din Baloch" or "Chief Conservator of Forests Sharifuddin"). One says the identification is based on size and spot pattern, which is suggestive rather than definitive. I do wonder how much it was a presumption that a leopard in Balochistan would be a Persian leopard rather than an Indian leopard based on simple geography. It would be interesting to see what he really said. However, the analyses of the hair samples would contradict this designation. Is there a way of mentioning the claim while saying it's probably an Indian leopard?

As an aside, I couldn't help wondering what was meant by an "abundance of tandoori food". Not what I associate with leopard food, so I assume it means something different. —  Jts1882 | talk  17:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

To add to this apparent confusion about which subspecies in Pakistan : a team of Pakistani biologists analysed leopard samples a few years ago + concluded that leopards in Pakistan are genetically closest to the Amur leopard (Ijaz et al. 2017), half a continent away. I never dared to add this to any of the leopard subpages, as this seems so very far-fetched. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

A belated reply but this comment made me curious. The Ijaz et al 2017 study only looked at three other leopards. The one in Pakistan was closer to the two east Asian leopards than the African one. They didn't sample Indian or Persian/Anatolian leopards, which limits the conclusions that can be drawn other than that they probably all come from a lineage that left Africa. —  Jts1882 | talk  10:11, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

This article casts a poor light on all involved publishing it : the authors, the editors + the peer reviewers of this journal, the Pakistan Journal of Zoology!! – BhagyaMani (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Re tandoori food : most ridiculous stuff I've ever read in conjunction with leopards -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:25, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

So maybe one of you experts should write in the "characteristics" section of this article what the visible differences are between the 2 subspecies. By the way I cannot speak Urdu but I see saxicolor is mentioned on https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AA%DB%8C%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%88%D8%A7 so you could maybe ask on that talk pageChidgk1 (talk) 17:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Ha! It was Pocock himself who stated that leopard skins vary so much in both colour and spot pattern, don't remember in which of his many writings about leopards. So it is close to impossible to identify a subspecies based solely on these features. The ONLY modern means to figure this out is a genetic analysis of either hair or blood samples and compare the results with samples deposited in GeneBanks!! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

If you happen to remember it would be rather nice to cite Pocock in his own words.Chidgk1 (talk) 18:40, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Follow the url to Pocock (1930), the first part, and then go on reading the 2nd part from this page onward : https://archive.org/details/journalofbomb34121930bomb/page/306/mode/2up. If you still want to read more, then see Pocock (1939) at https://archive.org/details/PocockMammalia1/page/n273/mode/2up?view=theater. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

I will remove the inline reference to the newspaper article, see also WP:NOTNEWS. Do you object? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

No objection - you know more than I do Chidgk1 (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

I really don't want to stoke up more nationalism but "Pakistan" is now mentioned in the lead but not the body. So should it be removed or changed to "formerly Pakistan" or "possibly Pakistan" or "possibly neighboring countries" or "formerly neighbouring countries". I somewhat favor the last option.Chidgk1 (talk) 09:31, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Pakistan is mentioned as tulliana range country by Kitchener et al. (2017). But to date, there is no genetic study supporting this. – BhagyaMani (talk) 10:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

References

Iranian Leopard

Is there a precise reason for which this species is not also referred to as the Iranian Leopard? Since it inhabits Iran as well, it should also have the name Iranian Leopard, since Persia denotes the ancient predecessor of Iran. I understand that the name is not sourced/linked (yet), but the question still lingers, If anyone can answer this for me, it would be much appreciated. Firekong1 (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Where did you see the name 'Iranian leopard' used in literature? – BhagyaMani (talk) 20:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm cannot recall at the moment, but I remember it was used in a news article regarding leopard subspecies referring to the animal as such. If I find the article (and indeed any literature that uses the name "Iranian Leopard", then will it be valid for entry? Firekong1 (talk) 21:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, I found it here:http://www.cathouse-fcc.org/persian-leopard-.html This was the article I was referring to, though I am not sure if this counts as a legitimate and acceptable source.

I also found another use of the name in a paper here. [1] [2] I hope this counts as being acceptable and helps with this debacle. Firekong1 (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Websites are not relevant as refs for a name, and ↑ link is expired. – BhagyaMani (talk) 05:10, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Urls at watermark.silverchair are ALWAYS temporary, i.e. expire when leaving them!! – BhagyaMani (talk) 13:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Here, this should help: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271335940_Molecular_and_craniological_analysis_of_leopard_Panthera_pardus_Carnivora_Felidae_in_Iran_Support_for_a_monophyletic_clade_in_Western_Asia

The name of the paper is Molecular and craniological analysis of leopard, Panthera pardus (Carnivora: Felidae) in Iran: support for a monophyletic clade in Western Asia.

unsigned comment added by Firekong1 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

ALREADY referenced!! I recommend that READ this page. – BhagyaMani (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

So should we add in Iranian Leopard or not? Firekong1 (talk) 16:53, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

No. These authors did not suggest to use this as a common name for the subspecies, but merely referred to the individuals studied in Iran. – BhagyaMani (talk) 17:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Alright then. But in case of future reference for which this term is used a common name, then can it be added in? I'm simply asking to avoid potential misunderstandings when the name is used more often as a common name. Firekong1 (talk) 17:18, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

For info - there is already a redirect Chidgk1 (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

And where would this redirect be? Firekong1 (talk) 00:44, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iranian_leopard&redirect=no was created in 2006. I am guessing that Google search uses the redirect because when I google for "Iranian Leopard" this article is the top result. Best wishes for your future studies and I hope you can help preserve these magnificent animals. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:39, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Chidgk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Firekong1 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC) Just for clarification, in the future when the name is potentially used as a common name, I will NOT hesitate to add it in. In fact, when I achieve my goal of pursuing studies of the natural world, I may publish several papers using this common name, though I personally not sure if this is legitimate, allowed, or even legal. In addition, you (Bhagya) never said how long a name must be in use for it to be added within a page. Firekong1 (talk) 01:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Possible for range map to also show topography?

Middle East topographic map

I mean could the range be superimposed on a cropped version of this? Or would that be too hard to make out? Perhaps range boundaries could be blurred.

Because that might help to visualize how populations are separated (if known). For example presumably impossible to cross Georgian lowlands nowadays.

Chidgk1 (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

The boundary of polygons for its distribution would be the same in any other basemap. Therefore: why do you think that a basemap showing topography would better visualize separation of populations than the present map? Did any author ever suggest that Georgian lowland may be a barrier to dispersal? – BhagyaMani (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I am just guessing about the lowlands. It is not clear from the existing range map how many populations there are. Maybe because we don't know? Do we have any idea about how many populations there are? Chidgk1 (talk) 10:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

The present map indicates 3 disconnected population units. But this map is based on knowledge from 2016, or even a bit earlier, i.e. does not display later records outside these 3 main areas. – BhagyaMani (talk) 10:24, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes I guess research in Afghanistan has been difficult or impossible for quite a while. So as far as we know there are 3 not including Afghanistan? But that is not obvious from the map. Because if we look at the joined up dashed areas there are at least 4. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Well, that's a matter of perspective and definition of 'population'. I included Afghanistan into the central polygon stretching from southern Armenia via area south of Caspian Sea + eastward, as there are large areas indicated as 'possibly extant', i.e. areas that had not been surveyed until 2016. – BhagyaMani (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

https://www.thezooscientist.com/persian-leopard seems to be saying each population is less than 100 if I understood right Chidgk1 (talk) 17:29, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Is it the largest leopard?

https://www.thezooscientist.com/persian-leopard says so but does anyone have a better cite? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:26, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I recommend not to rely on claims made on websites. I doubt that anyone had enough samples to compare size with e.g. the African leopard. – BhagyaMani (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Population estimate

The figure in the Guardian article of Feb 2022 for the wild population are NOT recent ones; and the source for this figure is ???. The latest estimate referred to in the 2020 IUCN Red List account dates 2008 : 800-1000 mature individuals, see Stein et al. (2020), ref 1. – BhagyaMani (talk) 06:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

‎Chidgk1 Population details ARE already in the main text, see section *Conservation*. And the appropriate reference for population estimate is certainly NOT a newspaper article by a journalist, but either the authors of the resp. Red List or a publication referenced by them. This is standard across WP pages on animals, at least those assessed as GA or FA quality. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

BhagyaMani Unless you are submitting this for a good article nomination - which would obviously be great - the Guardian is fine as a ref as you can see at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources . This is not a medical article with special cite rules. I don't know what a good article reviewer would say. However if there are recent scientific studies or reports then you are right it would be better to use those. I am not an expert on Iran but I guess the human population has grown a lot since 2008 and there may well have been other pressures on habit. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Marked my previous comment. I know the Guardian is considered reliable, but this is irrelevant: this journo's main topic is a wounded and treated leopard, so this is what should be mentioned here, if it was important. But the topic is neither a new population estimate nor a review of the latest figures. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:46, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Afghanistan

Probably unlikely to have anything useful so I doubt worth paying to read but I link here in case anyone already has free access and wants to check https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-021-01655-1 Chidgk1 (talk) 06:14, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Lead could maybe have 1 or 2 more paragraphs?

If you agree maybe you would like to add some of the most important info. Chidgk1 (talk) 10:41, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

@BhagyaMani @Firekong1

As you have the time to add and remove serial commas, maybe you have the time to add a little more info to the lead? I understand some readers or smart speakers or other extractors may only read the lead - so I guess more info there would be useful? For example the lead does not say what is being done about the animals being endangered. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hahaha, I think that serial commas are superfluous and agree that the present lead is too short. Don't you have the time to expand it? BhagyaMani (talk) 06:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Hopefully yes but nobody else seems interested in the Forest in Turkey article so I would like to get that up to good standard - interesting that the source I just added here for Turkmenistan talks about connectivity - last year I noticed a big hole in our border fence with Armenia but I suspect that was made by a farmer not a leopard Chidgk1 (talk) 07:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

What's wrong with having serial commas? I think it's needed in this case. Firekong1 (talk) 09:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

I can see you are both knowledgable and interested in animals. So it seems to me that if you cooperated on content and left grammar to people with less zoological expertise this article could be improved more quickly.

So as the meaning of the sentence is the same either way I say you are both wrong - wrong to add and to remove. Perhaps I am also wrong for not just ignoring both the change and revert. Chidgk1 (talk) 11:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Firekong1: it's been 4 times now since Dec 2021 that you inserted an unsourced name into the lead. This is disruptive editing. Let it be! BhagyaMani (talk) 13:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

If cites should be in lead please let me know Chidgk1 (talk) 12:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

P. p. tulliana->Persian leopard

I think the article should be called Persian leopard. This is the most common name for the subspecies. --Altaileopard (talk) 14:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Please see the frequently asked questions above Chidgk1 (talk) 14:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

And this link to the 2nd merger proposal closed on 5 March last year : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Persian_leopard&oldid=1010436246#Merger_proposal_2 – BhagyaMani (talk) 16:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Status?

IP editor changed from EN to NT and I reverted as cite had not been changed - but should it be VU as that is what cite says? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:25, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

See Stein et al. (2020). : The Leopard of southwestern Asia .., however, due to overall low numbers and restricted range, this subspecies should remain listed as Endangered. – BhagyaMani (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

What else should be added to lead?

For example how do we know Indian leopard is a different subspecies as they apparently interbreed? Chidgk1 (talk) 09:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Essentially the lead is supposed to be a summary, an abstract of statements made in the following sections. So references are not needed, but should be placed in the relevant sections. I would not refer to other subspecies in the lead, but only to what is important about THIS one. BhagyaMani (talk) 09:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

It is not yet clear in the body of the article how it is different from the Indian, so OK you are right that needs to be clarified first before deciding whether important enough for lead. By the way why did you remove the link to Flagship species? Chidgk1 (talk) 10:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

As per Manual of Style, piped links should be kept as intuitive as possible. BhagyaMani (talk) 11:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Also how do we know that habitat destruction is more important than fragmentation? Chidgk1 (talk) 11:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Source required?

Is a source for the name "Iranian leopard" really required? The rest of the common names lack sources. Firekong1 (talk) 14:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is but as we don’t have any refs in the lead if you really want to you could create a names subsection in the body for the umpteen names and their refs. Or just create redirects - I do that often as it is very easy in Visual Editor Chidgk1 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

If Firekong1 had bothered to read more than just the lead, s/he would have realised that common names are referred to in other sections and in referenced sources. So a distinct section on names is not necessary. – BhagyaMani (talk) 19:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Chidgk1 Am I allowed to create a names subsection then? I could add the common names that aren't on the lead. Firekong1 (talk) 19:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Enough with the grammar timewasting

Sometimes “the” is important for the meaning - here it is not.

@Firekong1 You are too young to become a grammar pedant

@Bhagyamani You are too old to be wasting your time antagonising people over unimportant stuff

I did not go to Oxford or Cambridge so I don’t care about Oxford commas and I can propel the punt from either end Chidgk1 (talk) 19:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

@Chidgk1 apologies, I won't let it happen again. But what should I do about the common name issue? Firekong1 (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

I don’t think there is a problem with common names. For example as a native English speaker here in Turkey I just say “leopard” in English as we only have one subspecies in the country, so the subspecies is obvious to the person I am talking to. Maybe there is subspecies range overlap in Afghanistan, but native English speakers there have bigger problems to worry about I suspect.

And most people in the countries mentioned in the article are not native English speakers anyway so would likely use the common name in their own language. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata

I attempted to merge Wikidata item Persian leopard (Q729713) with persian leopard (Q754336) but was unsuccessful. If you are skilled with Wikidata perhaps you would like to try. Chidgk1 (talk) 20:01, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata is problematic in cases like this. Essentially. the Wikidata items are on taxon names, Panthera pardus saxicolor and Panthera pardus tulliana, respectively, not on the taxon as the instance of property suggests. You can't merge two different taxon names, even though the taxa are now considered the same. People change the language labels according to some taxonomic hypothesis (i.e both now being Persian leopard), but that doesn't always match the rest of the item. —  Jts1882 | talk  20:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Size of subpopulations?

I don’t know any Farsi but from Google Translate that article seems to say that all subpopulations are less than 100 animals but without a recent cite.

Is this true and if so how do we know? Chidgk1 (talk) 20:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Name of subspecies

National Geographic, IUCN, WWF and... all of them are called Persian leopard. What is the scientific name of this subspecies depends on taxonomists, but the largest population of this leopard lives in Iran. That we call the Persian leopard the Anatolian leopard is like calling the Indian leopard the Pakistani leopard from now on, because some of them live in Pakistan. This is ridiculous. User:‎Mohammad.hasnaki

'Anatolian leopard' is the oldest name used in scientific literature, which is why it is the first in the list of common names. In WP, we do not go by what is written in newspapers, magazines or blogs of NGOs – that would be ridiculous. So please STOP changing this. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

Being older does not necessarily mean being more correct. The oldest scientific name of the African leopard, for example, was Felis pardus panthera. Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 09:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: please comment and also see this page's history. Both Chidgk1 and I have repeatedly reverted above new user's quite disruptive edits. – BhagyaMani (talk) 09:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

I've blocked them for being disruptive for 31 hours. - UtherSRG (talk) 10:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

disruptive? Don't worry friend! I didn't do anything wrong, I just tried to put the most common name of this subspecies before the less common names. In addition, I added a lot of material about the role of this subspecies in ancient Iranian culture, which friends deleted without reason. I think their activity is more disruptive :) Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 14:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I reverted because a reason for the change was not given. Unless there is any Wikipedia rule that the oldest common name should come first I think that @Mohammad.hasnakis argument that the name of the largest population should come first is fine. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Another consideration is that the Anatolian leopard and Persian leopard were names applied to different populations, which were considered different races or subspecies at the time. While they are now all subsumed under the same subspecies name, this doesn't mean the common names apply to the whole subspecies. We really should be saying something like this subspecies as currently circumscribed has been called Anatolian leopard and Persian leopard in different parts of the range. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Huh - I don’t understand that and I don’t think a typical reader would either. Both common names are still in use. Also we know some cross the Iran-Turkey border and other borders. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree with ‎Jts1882 + recall that this issue of names used for population units in different parts of the region was discussed before we decided to merge the previous separate pages on Anatolian and Persian leopard. BhagyaMani (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Added. – BhagyaMani (talk) 18:54, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

When we talk about the common name (not the scientific name), we have to pay attention to what most people in the world know the subspecies by. I'm sure that most people use the name persian leopard (probably except Turkish people). Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 11:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

So what? Do you mean to suggest that the name used by Turkish people is less appropriate? If so, then this is your personal opinion, which is irrelevant here. BhagyaMani (talk) 12:22, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

The name used by the Turks is less common. Because the only people who use it are Turks. We are talking about the common name. And it goes without saying that Persian leopard is a much more common name compared to Anatolian leopard. The first name is common all over the world and the second name only in Turkey (a country that has only a very small population of these leopards). Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 13:10, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Your understanding of how we operate here is flawed. I suggest you take some time to work in other areas of the encyclopedia for a time. Your insistence on one particular point of view is contrary to one of our core prinicples. Please move on, or you are likely to get blocked for increasingly longer times. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. But please don't threaten :) Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 15:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Also, I would expect Wikipedia to thank users who add content, not remove their content for no reason. Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 15:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Google returns very few results for "Asia Minor Leopard" and many of those are wikipedia copies. The IUCN lists "Persian Leopard, Anatolian Leopard, Caucasian Leopard, Central Asian Leopard, North Persian Leopard, West Asian Leopard" as common English names, so I suggest we use some or all of these. I think the first three would be enough, which I think correspond to previously described subspecies. Persian leopard does seem more common. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

You are right that Asia Minor leopard has not been used in many decades; seems that Pocock was the only one in the late 1930s, only referred to by Ullrich & Riffel (1993). But apart from Caucasian leopard, I haven't seen the other names used in any publication referenced here. BhagyaMani (talk) 15:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

That's what I thought, too, which is why I suggested the first three: "Persian Leopard, Anatolian Leopard, Caucasian Leopard". Incidentally, I've just noticed the discussion at the top of the page from three years ago. We seem to through cycles of determining a consensus text and then restoring it after other changes. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:51, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

And Pocock used 'Asia Minor leopard' interchangeably with 'leopard skins from Asia Minor', supposedly for skins that he couldn't clearly identify as originating from Persia. –BhagyaMani (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Is your benchmark the most common name? Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 15:46, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm basing it on the IUCN as a reliable secondary source for common English names and then Google to get a measure of how often they are used recently. —  Jts1882 | talk  15:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Has IUCN used the common name Iranian leopard or Anatolian leopard? Mohammad.hasnaki (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2024 (UTC)