Talk:Cave lion

Panthera spelaea redirect
Why does Panthera spelaea redirect here? Why doesn't it just redirect to Panthera leo spelaea? 98.65.161.14 (talk) 16:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Because Cave Lion once redirected to spelaea. I'll change it. FunkMonk (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 1) Numbered list item

propose conversion to Set index article
I participate in wp:DPL and arrived at this article because the disambiguation page cave lion appears in this month's Disambiguation Challenge (or otherwise appears in worklists of wp:DPL). I took steps to convert this to a Set index article (SIA) but have been reverted, so come to the Talk page.

The term "cave lion" is a valid topic for a Set Index Article. Please see wp:Set Index Article. As discussed at wt:DPL for bollworm and other common names of animals, the term is more general than any one of the species listed, and while experts may see great differences, to the regular person they're pretty much the same. All of the items on the cave lion page are notable examples of one general thing, which fits with being an SIA. If "cave lion" is a disambiguation page, then simple usages are not allowed and will be deleted by the ongoing processes of disambiguation. It would be better to have a page which can be linked to.

At bollworm and other common animal name articles, with the lead and/or consensus of at least one WikiProject Biology editor, some editors including myself have been converting animal common name disambiguation pages to SIAs when we come across them. (About 20 of these appear in Category:Former disambiguation pages converted to set index articles.) A bigger campaign to systematically address all of them which are suitable is intended (wt:DPL). There are advantages besides the linkability reason associated with actual common usage of the term. A set index article can include tabulation, pictures, references, and other features not allowed in disambiguation pages. In a set index article, more factual information about the members can be provided, which is helpful even for readers who are just trying to find their way to a specific species article, but which will be stripped out by disambiguation-focused editors. SIAs can serve the disambiguation function better than DABs, in practice, and they can also serve readers just needing a quick overview.

Here, the term is used in practice to mean cave lions generally, not specific to the species of different areas. As of a report today, there are 14 inbound links from mainspace articles. In at least some of these, including Ayla (Earth's Children), the term "cave lion" is used non-specifically AFAICT. I want to convert this page to an SIA but will certainly pause for discussion (as for a Requested Move) and will hope for a consensus to emerge.

(In the meantime, to prevent overly energetic disambiguators from eradicating good incoming links along with bad ones, I want to take the temporary step of placing a "disambiguation-stop" template rather than a "disambiguation" template on the page. It appears the same to readers.  It just removes the page from disambiguation categories and ensures that inbound dablinks will not be targeted, pending discussion here.  I do hope this temporary change will be accepted.) -- do  ncr  am  17:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The problem is that cave lions have little in common other than having cave in their name and being lions. Two of them are possibly related, the American lion is not, so there is no "broad concept" here to cover. FunkMonk (talk) 17:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That is a lot in common, from another perspective. Compare this to say Gadfly where the items include films, persons, ships, and more.
 * A big point is that people can reasonably use the term in a general sense, and they often cannot or do not want to make a finer distinction. They may want to link to the general term, allowing readers interested in the general topic to go further, to find their way to the existing three articles on species.  Why not allow that?
 * About what to cover, there does not have to be a lot. Salient identifying information, such as location and durations of existence, perhaps images if available and especially if those convey differences, would be appropriate.  Overall comparisons, such as your point should be included (namely that according to experts two of them are possibly related while the American one is not), with sourcing.  That is not something that should be stated without sources, so it cannot appear on a disambiguation page, so don't classify it as a disambiguation page.
 * Could you please expand on what you think is a problem about this? -- do ncr  am  17:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

"Cave lion (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Cave lion (Disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 16:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)