Talk:Orca: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:36, 19 February 2024 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,294,325 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Orca/Archive 6, Talk:Orca/Archive 7) (bot← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 10:05, 21 December 2024 edit undo62.73.72.3 (talk) →Longevity in captivity vs in the wild: new sectionTag: New topic
(30 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
⚫	{{Top 25 Report\|Sep 7 2014 (18th)}}
⚫	{{Old move\|date=January 2009 \|from=Orca \|destination=Killer Whale \|result=Moved\|link=Talk:Orca/Archive_4#Requested_move
⚫	\|date2=January 2010 \|from2=Killer Whale \|destination2=Killer whale \|result2=Moved\|link2=Talk:Orca/Archive_5#Requested_move
⚫	\|date3=March 2010 \|from3=Killer whale \|destination3=Orca \|result3=Not moved\|link3=Talk:Orca/Archive_5#Move?
⚫	\|date4=June 2015 \|from4=Killer whale \|destination4=Orca \|result4=Not moved \|link4=Talk:Orca/Archive_6#Requested_move_19_June_2015
⚫	\|date5=January 2022 \|from5=Killer whale \|destination5=Orca \|result5=Moved \|link5=Talk:Orca/Archive_6#Requested_move_25_January_2022}}
	{{talkheader}}		{{talkheader}}
	{{ArticleHistory		{{ArticleHistory
Line 29:		Line 23:
	{{WikiProject Cascadia}}		{{WikiProject Cascadia}}
	{{WikiProject Africa\|importance=low}}		{{WikiProject Africa\|importance=low}}
	{{WikiProject Norway}}		{{WikiProject Norway \|importance=Low}}
	{{WikiProject Arctic\|importance=mid}}		{{WikiProject Arctic\|importance=mid}}
	{{WikiProject Mammals\|importance=mid}}		{{WikiProject Mammals\|importance=mid}}
	{{WikiProject Marine life\|importance=Mid}}		{{WikiProject Marine life\|importance=Mid}}
	}}		}}
		⚫	{{Old move\|date=January 2009 \|from=Orca \|destination=Killer Whale \|result=Moved\|link=Talk:Orca/Archive_4#Requested_move
		⚫	\|date2=January 2010 \|from2=Killer Whale \|destination2=Killer whale \|result2=Moved\|link2=Talk:Orca/Archive_5#Requested_move
		⚫	\|date3=March 2010 \|from3=Killer whale \|destination3=Orca \|result3=Not moved\|link3=Talk:Orca/Archive_5#Move?
		⚫	\|date4=June 2015 \|from4=Killer whale \|destination4=Orca \|result4=Not moved \|link4=Talk:Orca/Archive_6#Requested_move_19_June_2015
		⚫	\|date5=January 2022 \|from5=Killer whale \|destination5=Orca \|result5=Moved \|link5=Talk:Orca/Archive_6#Requested_move_25_January_2022}}
	{{Refideas\|{{cite news\|url=https://apnews.com/355cf8f5397f439d993431328cbf2bfa\|publisher=]\|title=Scientists discover different kind of killer whale off Chile\|last=Borenstein\|first=Seth\|date=March 7, 2019}}}}		{{Refideas\|{{cite news\|url=https://apnews.com/355cf8f5397f439d993431328cbf2bfa\|publisher=]\|title=Scientists discover different kind of killer whale off Chile\|last=Borenstein\|first=Seth\|date=March 7, 2019}}}}
	{{Spoken Misplaced Pages request\|Catfurball\|Important}}		{{Spoken Misplaced Pages request\|Catfurball\|Important}}
		⚫	{{Top 25 Report\|Sep 7 2014 (18th)}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav\|noredlinks=y}}		\|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav\|noredlinks=y}}
Line 51:		Line 51:
	}}		}}

			== Surfer Bitten claim needs a source ==
	== Better wording for section of threats to humans in opening ==

		⚫	You cannot make claims like this without citing a primary source. This needs to be deleted until it can be cited. ] (]) 20:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
	The sentence "Wild orcas are not considered a threat to humans, and no fatal attack on humans has ever been documented." doesn't read well for me. In particular I missed the "Wild" at the beginning which is key for correct understanding of the second half. Also the passive construction "are not considered" could be considered 'weasel words'. I think something like "Orcas are not usually a threat to humans, and no fatal attack has ever been documented in their natural habitat." would be an improvement. Thoughts? ] (]) 06:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
		⚫	:The source at the end of the sentence supports the surfer part of the sentence too. {{tq\|"There has never been a documented fatal killer whale attack on a human. The only relatively well-documented bite was one suffered by a surfer in California in the early 1970s"}} ] ] 20:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
		⚫	:If you'd like to do more research, the surfer's name was Hans Kretschmer, and it happened in 1972. Here's the contemporary news report from ''The Los Angeles Times'': . ] ] 21:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

			== New Speciesbox image? ==
	:{{u\| Eluchil404}}, I agree. ] (]) 12:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
	:Done. ] (]) 05:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

			Per , ''Orcinus'' has been split. The existing Speciesbox image depicts the transient population, now ''Orcinus rectipinnus''. I'm not entirely sure which image would be the best replacement, or if it needs to be replaced at all, but I thought it'd be a good idea to bring it up. ] (]) 14:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
	== Wolf should be linked to Sinonyx a carnivorous artiodactyl which was the ancestors of whales ==

			:For mammals, we wait until secondary sources pick up the work of primary sources. Typically, this means waiting until the new species appears in ASM's MDD, so I'm going to revert your recent changes. - ] ] 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
	"wolves of the sea" should be linked to Sinonyx a carnivorous artiodactyl (Mesonychid) also called "wolf on hoofs" ] (]) 10:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
			::Ah, got it. Wasn't aware of that requirement. ] (]) 17:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
			:::No worries. Misplaced Pages is a simple complex. ;) - ] ] 17:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
			::::And if they are split, this article would be about the genus ''Orcinus'' so the current picture would still be appropriate. ] (]) 01:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

			== MDD Update ==
	:That would not be appropriate for this article, nor for the place where "wolf" is mentioned. - ] ] 13:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
	::There is also the problem of how mesonychids are not artiodactyls to begin with.] (]) 20:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

			ASM's MDD now has both '''' and '''' listed, though acknowledges that ''O. orca'' remains paraphyletic. Meanwhile, the Society for Marine Mammalogy (considered a taxonomic authority on marine mammals) as subspecies until further research clarifies their status. Separate pages for resident and Bigg's types wouldn't be difficult, at least, but this page might need to be changed. It could be moved to ''Orcinus'' and discuss just the genus, which would require a separate ''O. orca'' page. Or it could remain as-is (with added information on these recent taxonomic proposals) until there's a clearer picture of what researchers are using. ] (]) 04:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
	== Whale vs Dolphin ==

			:It's only a matter of time that the paraphyly will get resolved once further research on the other types are done. If we split the two taxa off into their own articles, we could use the common names for the three subspecies SMM adopted but with "orca" instead of "killer whale." So "resident orca," "Bigg's orca," and "common orca." ] \| ] 19:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
	Orcas are not whales. They are dolphins. You said they are toothed whales in the dolphin family which doesn’t make sense. How can it be a whale and dolphin. Sailors used to call them whale killers because they would prey on big whales. This originated today as killer whales. ] (]) 05:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
			::It does seem that we are nearing the time to make a significant taxonomic update here. It would be good to have the paraphyly sorted out, but with MDD being updated, I have no strong objection left. I suggest making this page to be about both the genus and the paraphyly, while information about the two new species can be their own articles. Once the paraphyly is resolved, we can then erect appropriate new articles and make this one to be only about the genus. - ] ] 19:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
			::As for name, I actually think we should just use the scientific name for the species articles, and continue to use 'orca' for the genus article; the species' common names aren't that common. - ] ] 19:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
			:::I would disagree with the uncommonality of the common name. Both resident and Bigg's/transient (latter being rapidly replaced by the former) were exclusively used to describe the two groups by both scientists and laypeople familiar with them since they were recognized in the 70s. I was also curious regarding adopting full species status instead of subspecies; given that SMM accepted only subspecies status, and there's a good chance that other scientists are going to follow that lead for the time being.
			:::If we used the common names for the articles, then it would grant flexibility for changing between species/subspecies in the taxobox. I suppose that "common orca" is indeed an invention of SMM, but I think a similar situation happened with ] and the article just accepted it anyways with a note? Alternatively, we could temporarily keep ''O. orca'' as "Orca" and ''Orcinus'' as is; I recall having seen a similar precedent of one species taking the base name without any adjectives, but am still trying to look for it again. ] \| ] 23:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

	== ~~Surfer~~ ~~Bitten~~ ~~claim~~ ~~needs~~ a ~~source~~ ==		== Section on threats in intro needs sources ==

			TL;DR The sentence in the intro naming 5 threats to orca populations needs citations.
⚫	You cannot make claims like this without citing a primary source. This needs to be deleted until it can be cited. ] (]) 20:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

⚫	:The source at the end of the sentence supports the surfer part of the sentence too. {{tq\|"There has never been a documented fatal killer whale attack on a human. The only relatively well-documented bite was one suffered by a surfer in California in the early 1970s"}} ] ] 20:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
			The section at the beginning has no sources while making 5 factual claims (about things that are threats to orca populations). The one specifically that caused me to doubt and made me think to check was the one about capture for marine mammal parks -- With tens of thousands of animals in the wild, and very few such parks with only a few orca each, I didn't see how this could ever be a threat to population numbers. I looked it up, and it turns out, the claim is support by NOAA! So I will add the source for that claim. Unfortunately I don't have the time to research the other 4. Help would be appreciated. ] (]) 03:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
⚫	:If you'd like to do more research, the surfer's name was Hans Kretschmer, and it happened in 1972. Here's the contemporary news report from ''The Los Angeles Times'': . ] ] 21:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

			:The relevant information is in ]. I would agree that marine mammal capture is likely a small issue compared to the others for the global population, although it may be a local issue. ] (]) 03:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
			::It is indeed an issue concerning certain smaller populations. ] (]) 08:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

			== Longevity in captivity vs in the wild ==

			Two studies with opposite conclusions are cited on this subject, but the findings of one of these are retold extensively and stated as fact, while those of the other one are only briefly noted, sandwiched in the middle of the exposition of the findings of the first study, and they are explicitly attributed as the position of its authors only. If this is the only material available, the exposition should be more even-handed, with an equal level of detail and comparable information from both studies and with both positions being explicitly attributed rather than any one of them being presented as the truth. Of course, it is possible that the first study reflects the position predominating among researchers in the field and the second one is isolated, but if so, it should be possible to demonstrate that with more references. ] (]) 10:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:05, 21 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Orca article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months

Orca is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 4, 2005.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 3, 2004	Featured article candidate	Promoted
April 3, 2010	Featured article review	Kept
Current status: Featured article

This

level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Cetaceans (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cetaceans, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CetaceansWikipedia:WikiProject CetaceansTemplate:WikiProject CetaceansCetaceans

Japan Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 00:51, December 29, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Misplaced Pages into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Canada: British Columbia Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

United States: Washington Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Mid-importance).

Cascadia

This article is part of WikiProject Cascadia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Cascadia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CascadiaWikipedia:WikiProject CascadiaTemplate:WikiProject CascadiaCascadia

Africa Low‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Norway Low‑importance

	Norway portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Arctic Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArcticWikipedia:WikiProject ArcticTemplate:WikiProject ArcticArctic
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mammals Mid‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

Moved, January 2009, from Orca to Killer Whale, see discussion.
Moved, January 2010, from Killer Whale to Killer whale, see discussion.
Not moved, March 2010, from Killer whale to Orca, see discussion.
Not moved, June 2015, from Killer whale to Orca, see discussion.
Moved, January 2022, from Killer whale to Orca, see discussion.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Borenstein, Seth (March 7, 2019). "Scientists discover different kind of killer whale off Chile". Associated Press.

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

September 7 to 13, 2014 (18th)

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7

Talk:Orca/Should the page be at Orca or Killer Whale (resolution: Orca (Dec 2003); Killer Whale (Jan 2009))
Talk:Orca/Is it a dolphin, a whale, both?! (resolution: both (2004))

This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Surfer Bitten claim needs a source

You cannot make claims like this without citing a primary source. This needs to be deleted until it can be cited. 76.93.232.99 (talk) 20:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

The source at the end of the sentence supports the surfer part of the sentence too. "There has never been a documented fatal killer whale attack on a human. The only relatively well-documented bite was one suffered by a surfer in California in the early 1970s" Schazjmd (talk) 20:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

If you'd like to do more research, the surfer's name was Hans Kretschmer, and it happened in 1972. Here's the contemporary news report from The Los Angeles Times: Whale Takes Bite From Surfer's Leg. Schazjmd (talk) 21:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

New Speciesbox image?

Per Morin et al. (2024), Orcinus has been split. The existing Speciesbox image depicts the transient population, now Orcinus rectipinnus. I'm not entirely sure which image would be the best replacement, or if it needs to be replaced at all, but I thought it'd be a good idea to bring it up. Borophagus (talk) 14:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

For mammals, we wait until secondary sources pick up the work of primary sources. Typically, this means waiting until the new species appears in ASM's MDD, so I'm going to revert your recent changes. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Wasn't aware of that requirement. Borophagus (talk) 17:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Misplaced Pages is a simple complex. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 17:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

And if they are split, this article would be about the genus Orcinus so the current picture would still be appropriate. LittleJerry (talk) 01:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

MDD Update

ASM's MDD now has both O. ater and O. rectipinnus listed, though acknowledges that O. orca remains paraphyletic. Meanwhile, the Society for Marine Mammalogy (considered a taxonomic authority on marine mammals) recognizes them as subspecies until further research clarifies their status. Separate pages for resident and Bigg's types wouldn't be difficult, at least, but this page might need to be changed. It could be moved to Orcinus and discuss just the genus, which would require a separate O. orca page. Or it could remain as-is (with added information on these recent taxonomic proposals) until there's a clearer picture of what researchers are using. YellowstoneLimestone (talk) 04:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It's only a matter of time that the paraphyly will get resolved once further research on the other types are done. If we split the two taxa off into their own articles, we could use the common names for the three subspecies SMM adopted but with "orca" instead of "killer whale." So "resident orca," "Bigg's orca," and "common orca." Macrophyseter | talk 19:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

It does seem that we are nearing the time to make a significant taxonomic update here. It would be good to have the paraphyly sorted out, but with MDD being updated, I have no strong objection left. I suggest making this page to be about both the genus and the paraphyly, while information about the two new species can be their own articles. Once the paraphyly is resolved, we can then erect appropriate new articles and make this one to be only about the genus. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

As for name, I actually think we should just use the scientific name for the species articles, and continue to use 'orca' for the genus article; the species' common names aren't that common. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I would disagree with the uncommonality of the common name. Both resident and Bigg's/transient (latter being rapidly replaced by the former) were exclusively used to describe the two groups by both scientists and laypeople familiar with them since they were recognized in the 70s. I was also curious regarding adopting full species status instead of subspecies; given that SMM accepted only subspecies status, and there's a good chance that other scientists are going to follow that lead for the time being.

If we used the common names for the articles, then it would grant flexibility for changing between species/subspecies in the taxobox. I suppose that "common orca" is indeed an invention of SMM, but I think a similar situation happened with common bottlenose dolphin and the article just accepted it anyways with a note? Alternatively, we could temporarily keep O. orca as "Orca" and Orcinus as is; I recall having seen a similar precedent of one species taking the base name without any adjectives, but am still trying to look for it again. Macrophyseter | talk 23:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Section on threats in intro needs sources

TL;DR The sentence in the intro naming 5 threats to orca populations needs citations.

The section at the beginning has no sources while making 5 factual claims (about things that are threats to orca populations). The one specifically that caused me to doubt and made me think to check was the one about capture for marine mammal parks -- With tens of thousands of animals in the wild, and very few such parks with only a few orca each, I didn't see how this could ever be a threat to population numbers. I looked it up, and it turns out, the claim is support by NOAA! So I will add the source for that claim. Unfortunately I don't have the time to research the other 4. Help would be appreciated. WiggyWamWam (talk) 03:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

The relevant information is in Orca#Conservation. I would agree that marine mammal capture is likely a small issue compared to the others for the global population, although it may be a local issue. CMD (talk) 03:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

It is indeed an issue concerning certain smaller populations. The Morrison Man (talk) 08:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Longevity in captivity vs in the wild

Two studies with opposite conclusions are cited on this subject, but the findings of one of these are retold extensively and stated as fact, while those of the other one are only briefly noted, sandwiched in the middle of the exposition of the findings of the first study, and they are explicitly attributed as the position of its authors only. If this is the only material available, the exposition should be more even-handed, with an equal level of detail and comparable information from both studies and with both positions being explicitly attributed rather than any one of them being presented as the truth. Of course, it is possible that the first study reflects the position predominating among researchers in the field and the second one is isolated, but if so, it should be possible to demonstrate that with more references. 62.73.72.3 (talk) 10:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: