Talk:Bronx Zoo/Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mohakam. Peer reviewers: Mohakam.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you! for creating this. Vicki Rosenzweig

Poor Article
I must say that this is one of the poorest entries I've seen on Wikipidia. There's practically no history of the park beyond it's opening, and the current News section (as of June, 2008) is more of a press release than an encyclopedic essay. If there are any scholars or well informed fans of the park out there, could you please improve the article!71.249.150.113 (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

At the beginning of the article, you state that the zoo has 4,000 animals, and a sentence later, you say there are 843 animals. Do you mean 843 different species? I changed it, just in case. Nschoem 23:39, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I checked the Bronx Zoo website. 843 refers to the number of animals the zoo had for exhibit when it first opened. I'm changing the sentence in the main article to clarify that fact. 74.139.211.114 07:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes to all the above. Other US zoos are better covered, including Philadelphia Zoo, San Diego Zoo, and even the little San Francisco Zoo.  There's also no discussion of the internal layout of exhibitions, how visitors go there and get around when they are there, or of the Zoo's relation to its neighbors and the whole city.  Instead there are many pictures of birds.  Good pictures, mostly, but the Commons gallery is a better place for the majority.  The article should be more informative about the Zoo itself.  Jim.henderson (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with the above comments! This article has little history, but does have enough space for a meaningless paragraph promoting some silly "green" bathroom project. At least Paul Manship's gate was noted, but nothing about the zoo's immense modernization makeover a few decades back (which is why I looked up this entry, to see when that was done in the first place).


 * Members of the Bronx Zoo Forum should be recruited to help as most are visitors going from when they were kids and would have an extensive knowledge. Sp07019 (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Zoo

 * Please consider helping to improve not only this article but all the articles under WikiProject Zoos WP:ZOO Scope. We are in desperate need of members.  Zoo Pro  08:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

4-D Experience
The Bronx Zoo Forum says to expect the the 4-D experience to hit the Bronx Zoo as with the NY Aquarium. Sp07019 (talk) 05:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

History Section
Not to pile on, but this is a remarkably weak article. Just as an example, the History section has a nice paragraph about the zoo opening in 1899, and then jumps in the next paragraph to the eco-friendly toilets installed in 2006. Really? Nothing interesting happened there in the intervening 107 years? Nothing about Ota Benga, the human being who was briefly living there and on exhibit? Or when did they change the name to Bronx Zoo? I'd take a stab myself, but I haven't been to this zoo in 30+ years, and can't do it justice. Surely there are some school kids in NYC who could improve this article. Please? Lafong (talk) 04:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Photos
I have placed some of the photos in the article body, and removed the rest because they will be available in Commons. This is about as many photos as an article this size can support, though there is still some space under "Conservation" and History. As the article explands, additional photos can be added from Commons. Photos should not only illustrate the subject (in this case the Bronx Zoo), but should be placed close to the points that they illustrate. Galleries (whether labeled as such or not) are discouraged per WP:Galleries now that we have Wikimedia Commons and links to it from the External links section. When adding photos to zoo article3s, keep in mind that generally we want to illustrate something about the zoo, not something about a specific animal. Closeups of animals are pretty (and seem to be about 95% of the pictures that people take at zoos) but they do not tell us anything about the zoo. Note that two of the photos I removed are also mislabeled. "Swan" is actually a duck, and "Capybara" is actually a Red River Hog. Donlammers (talk) 11:39, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * They look great! Nice job. Sp07019 (talk) 04:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

funding/budget
Any information on what the zoo's budget is and how it is funded? Endowment, grants, donations, tickets & merchandise, taxpayer support? Could warrant a whole (sub)section. Thanks -- InspectorTiger (talk) 00:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

not used in prior text
Cite error: tag with name "zoo_birds" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "nytimes_monkeyhouse" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_butterflies" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_jungle" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_monorail" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_gorillas" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_baboons" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_madagascar" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_african" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page). Cite error: tag with name "zoo_exhibits" defined in is not used in prior text (see the help page).

--Frze (talk) 16:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ FWIW, (almost?) all of those can be found at bronxzoo.com in case we need them again at some point. Doniago (talk) 17:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

lack of detail especially lack of description of exhibits!
I just wanted to confirm what others wrote previously. The article very much needs more information particularly on the exhibits which are described nicely in wikipedia for other large zoos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.83.146.37 (talk) 04:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Expanded significantly (18 KB) with description. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

NYT ARTICLE
In the article I read: "Around this time, an article in The New York Times stated, "It is too bad that there is not some society like the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children. We send our missionaries to Africa to Christianize the people, and then we bring one here to brutalize him."

I think that it should be specified that these are words by Rev. Dr. R. MacArthur of Calvary Baptist Church or it may be confused as the opinion of the newspaper.--93.150.159.81 (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I made the change as you suggested above. In the future, I hope you will be bold and fix it yourself. We could use the help and its fun and satisfying.  SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨   00:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

World of Darkness
There is a disambig statement at the top of this article saying to look at Bronx Zoo for info about an exhibit. I can't find "dark" anywhere on the page though.

Was this an exhibit from years ago? Does this article only cover current ones?

If there used to be, a section on former/cancelled exhibits would be nice. 184.145.18.50 (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Closed in 2009. This and/or this are, I believe, reliable sources that could be added to the article. DonIago (talk) 14:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I have now added both a section for recently-closed exhibits (current time-line from circa. 2000 to today; I know of no others) and, within that, a blurb on the aforementioned World of Darkness exhibit. BronxZooFan (talk) 16:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work on this. DonIago (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * No problem, my pleasure BronxZooFan (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Edits
Hello everyone. I have recently taken it upon myself to update this page and expand it like many of you have discussed the want for. However, after several hours of work today in expanding exhibit descriptions and the zoo conservation work with bison, I had all of my edits undone as they were seen as "vandalism". I don't exactly see how my work is being viewed that way so can someone please explain to me what I'm doing wrong? Also, is there any way to get my work back? I did a lot of research and cited my sources so I'm not sure what the issue is... BronxZooFan (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Dear New Editor: I've noticed your steady labors recently, and I felt grateful that someone was finally improving this important article. Please continue your work and do not be discouraged. Neither this edit nor this one – nor any other one you've made – could in any way be construed as vandalism. I fully support your right to edit Wikipedia with the same respect accorded to any other editor. Some of your work may indeed require touching up to meet style conventions here (or it may be challenged or removed if it remains unsupported by reliable sources), but the essential value of your work is welcomed and much appreciated. I hope you will continue to contribute to this and other articles, and enjoy positive interaction with the WP community in the future. SteveStrummer (talk) 23:28, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Dear SteverStrummer: Thank you. It is nice to see that the effort I'm putting into this indeed very important page is appreciated and that I'm working within the current rules and guidelines. Of course correct me on any formatting or other major errors. BronxZooFan (talk) 16:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Pinging ; as the editor who made the reverts I think they're entitled to explain themselves or at least be made directly aware of this conversation; I don't see that the edits were tagged specifically as vandalism though; please avoid characterizing reverts as such unless the term has specifically been used, as it has strong connotations. I might recommend that you make fewer incremental edits (perhaps using your sandbox first), and edit summaries would be very helpful as well. The way the history of the article currently reads, it's impossible to easily tell what you were doing and navigation has become very difficult in the process. DonIago (talk) 17:39, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see how you could say "I don't see that the edits were tagged specifically as vandalism though; please avoid characterizing reverts as such unless the term has specifically been used," unless you're simply not paying attention. Both Captain Raju and Flyer22Reborn specifically reverted this user for "vandalism" and even left a talkpage warning for him. Please go back and check the diffs I linked above. All of it was needlessly bitey, and totally incorrect. SteveStrummer (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry; not sure how I overlooked that. Not going to ping Flyer as their edits didn't relate to this article, but I wouldn't blame BZF for asking them for an explanation. DonIago (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I did receive a message saying some of my edits could constitute as vandalism. However, I imagine this is due to the fact that I was edited without an account at the time and some of them were quite small. I apologize if my previous editing is hard to follow and sometimes seems random, as with the rest of you I really want this page to be great so I'm trying to smooth it out and organize it in the best way possible. There's a lot of info. to add. I will try to remember to add edit summaries and check off if my edit is minor from now on. I also apologize for all of currently empty segments, this whole process is taking considerably longer than I had expected. If you'd prefer to not have the empty segments shown, feel free to remove them until I get around to creating the text. BronxZooFan (talk) 18:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Additions
If there are any articles, resources, news stories, history, or overall anything anybody wishes to be added on this page, please feel free to post it here. I feel it might be beneficial to have a solid place for people to post the information they wish to be added to the page, instead of creating a new section each time someone wants something added. Though if that's not how this works, sorry! BronxZooFan (talk) 18:50, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * May I suggest potentially making the info. in the History, Conservation, Safety incidents, and Animal escapes segments bullet pointed? A new bullet point per subject/story may make it much easier to read. Anyone else agree? BronxZooFan (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think subsections, which I believe is how it is currently, is preferable to bullet points. DonIago (talk) 19:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. To clarify I do not mean getting rid of the subsections, I meant bullet pointing the info. within them. This way each story is contained and separated from the next/previous one. But no matter, as long as it's still easy enough to read and understand BronxZooFan (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Why was the section I added on prices removed? Is it not considered relevant? That's fine if not, I'm just curious as to where it went. BronxZooFan (talk) 20:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Snouted cobra vs Egyptian cobra
I was talking with a reptile expert who I know, and he informed me that the cobra that escaped the zoo in March 2011 was actually a Snouted cobra and not an Egyptian cobra. The media reported the wrong name. Being as the two species were split from one another, it's not surprising the snake was misidentified. I just wanted to let everyone know about this so no one is confused about me changing the snake to the proper species. I know this article previously pointed out the proper species but that information was deleted. BronxZooFan (talk) 22:00, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's not appropriate. We report what reliable sources report, not what a "reptile expert" we can't verify indicated. DonIago (talk) 04:57, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * How can I verify it then? This guy has worked with reptiles his whole life and visually identified the animal, and as I stated before the animal in question has been identified as the correct species in the past. Surely going off of an experts identification is better than publishing information that's entirely incorrect. BronxZooFan (talk) 05:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * We can't go off one alleged expert's opinion on the matter any more than we could go off my opinion on the matter. We need a reliable source, which essentially means the correct information needs to have been published. Now, if this is a great concern for you, you could try removing the incorrect species...but if the allegedly incorrect name was in sources, then editors may contest that. You could perhaps add a clarifying note along the lines of "A cobra the NYT identified as a..." which keeps the information factually correct but suggests the NYT may have misidentified it. DonIago (talk) 15:25, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You may find this essay helpful: Verifiability, not truth. It's a weird thing about Wikipedia, but it really makes sense when you look at the big picture. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨   15:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * , the source I sited are the zoo's 2011 collection records, it shows what species they held. In 2011, the year of the escape, the records prove they held snouted cobra and not Egyptian cobra. BronxZooFan (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * That's synthesis. The source doesn't claim that the cobra was misidentified; you need one that does. DonIago (talk) 15:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Maleo
The caption for the Maleo image is incorrect, as is the text description. There are at least two other zoos that hold Maleo, Houston Zoo (http://www.houstonzoo.org/animals/maleo/) and Ragunan Zoo (https://www.zoochat.com/community/media/maleo-macrocephalon-maleo.2606/), therefore Bronx is not the only zoo outside of Sulawesi to hold the species. The reference used for this must be out of date. Jubblubs (talk) 21:27, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I made the change you suggested. In the future, you can be bold and do it yourself if you want. Thanks, SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨   21:36, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * At the time of writing Bronx was the only zoo to keep the species. Now Bronx-bred birds have been sent to Houston, San Diego, Tulsa, and Walsrode in Germany. Bronx is still the only zoo to breed this species afaik. BronxZooFan (talk) 03:44, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Largest Zoo
Does anyone have a source for the claim that this is the largest metropolitan zoo? Please do not cite a website that is citing this article. Also, what is a metropolitan zoo? By what factor are you calculating largest? -- ND State  17:48, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Date formats
I was going to change a date to 29 July 1985, but then I noticed all the dates were in what I believe is not the recommended format. --Zaurus (talk) 01:24, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Dates in articles about things in the US are usually in MDY (July 29, 1985) format. See MOS:DATETIES. Thanks, SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨   01:35, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Panda images
Why do you think that more panda images should be added rather than other pictures of the zoo? Pandas are great, but they are not everything. Also these images are not from the Bronx Zoo. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 04:20, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Inaccuracy
This article states that the Bronx Zoo has 650 species of animal. Later in a section on Jungle World it says that exhibit contains 800 species. How can one exhibit at the Bronx Zoo have 150 more species than the total number of species in the zoo? So, corrections are required to make this article more accurate. It is poorly written as its clear throughout there is a misunderstanding as to 'species' (a population of animals) and 'specimen' (an individual animal). The numbers of these are being carelessly confused.80.44.198.181 (talk) 10:24, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Both numbers are sourced from the zoo itself, but come from different dates. If you can find an updated source, please go ahead and update the article with new references. You can make the other corrections too. We are all volunteers. SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨ 15:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Nothing here about Ota Benga?
Why not mention the human beings who were put in the zoo by slave traders? I mean, that's probably the only reason most people have heard of the zoo in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.149.60.76 (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Look again. There's a whole section Bronx Zoo. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 18:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. But wouldn't it be much more sensible to put the Ota Benga thing in the "Early History" section of this article? And Ota Benga should also be mentioned in the overview (i.e the top part) of this article.103.149.60.76 (talk) 19:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that that wouldn't be undue weight, but I'm willing to hear your arguments in favor of it. DonIago (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree with the IP user above. Why make a mention of the zoo's first thyalacine in the "Early History" section, but not mention its first Homo sapiens? Also, Ota Benga should be mentioned in the indroduction section, too. I'm pretty sure that Ota Benga is indeed the reason many people have even heard about Bronx Zoo in the first place.103.108.146.240 (talk) 13:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC) `