Talk:List of primates

There is an RFC that may affect this page.
There is an RFC that may affect this page at WikiProject Tree of Life. The topic is Confusion over taxonomy of subtribe Panina and taxon homininae (are chimps hominins)?

Please feel free to comment there. SPACKlick (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Capitalization
I think the first letter of each species name should be capitalized. This would be consistent with the consensus on fauna names from a few years ago to use sentence case, and with MOS. Capitalizing the first letter of a list element does not conflict with sentence case, since the first letters of other words in the name are not capitalized. Capitalizing the first letter (regardless of whether it is a proper noun) would be consistent with how the list was formatted after the consensus was reached. It was later changed to use small letters for the first letter of each name unless it was a proper noun, for the reason that otherwise it wouldn't be obvious whether the capitalization was due to sentence case or due to being a proper noun, a rationale that is not in accordance with any guideline I am aware of. Capitalizing the first letter of each element would also be consistent with the formatting of primate featured lists, and with other lists of species within mammal orders. So I am not sure why some IPs want to use a different format for this list. If there is a good reason, please explain. Otherwise, I will revert to capitalizing the first letters. Rlendog (talk) 01:26, 15 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I posted this 2 weeks ago and so far there have been no objections. Before I proceed, does anyone have policy-based reasons why (excepting proper nouns) we should not follow the standard format of capitalizing the first letter of the list element (and not capitalizing elsewhere)? Rlendog (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
 * We should link directly to an article so if the article is called Homo sapiens we dont either trust in aredirect, Homo Sapiens or dab Homo Sapiens. You need to agree to changes at the species articles, if you dont I strongly object. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 01:20, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The actual article titles all have the first letter capitalized, i.e., Human, not human or Ruffed lemur, not ruffed lemur. Rlendog (talk) 16:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Extant
Is there any reason to only include extant species. I think this is wrong, we should include extinct species, as we do with other taxa lists, especially when it comes to Hominini this is likely to be of general interest. ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 01:23, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The articles all used the extant species, because those are of particular interest to readers looking for a list of primates. Which is not to say we can't have an article on List of extinct primates or List of extinct ape species if there is enough material for a reasonably-sized, non-redundant article. Indeed family articles, such as Cebidae and even Hominidae do include extinct taxa. Rlendog (talk) 16:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Three new lemur species
Here two sources for the description of the three new lemur species. BibTex citation:
 * @article {MEC:MEC13604,
 * author = {Hotaling, Scott and Foley, Mary E. and Lawrence, Nicolette M. and Bocanegra, Jose and Blanco, Marina B. and Rasoloarison, Rodin and Kappeler, Peter M. and Barrett, Meredith A. and Yoder, Anne D. and Weisrock, David W.},
 * title = {Species discovery and validation in a cryptic radiation of endangered primates: coalescent-based species delimitation in Madagascar's mouse lemurs},
 * journal = {Molecular Ecology},
 * issn = {1365-294X},
 * url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/mec.13604},
 * doi = {10.1111/mec.13604},
 * pages = {n/a--n/a},
 * keywords = {Bayesian, BPP, Bayes factor, Microcebus, nuclear},
 * year = {2016},
 * }

Peaceray (talk) 20:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Humans?
Why are humans not included on the list? Could someone who knows all the scientific names and the clades and all that mind adding humans to the list? Dpm12 (talk) 09:37, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Too many images
Over the past few weeks, an IP editor (139.0.212.61) has been adding a large amount of extra pictures, mainly with captions which seem unnecessary. For example, one image showing a table of humans eating is captioned with, "Humans are the only primates to eat ice cream, hamburgers, potato chips and French fries." Is this really necessary on an article about a list of primates? Before that IP editor's work, the pictures mainly consisted of the scientific name of the organism pictured and there was only one picture per animal. There were no captions reading things such as, "this gorilla doesn't look happy." In addition to this, the article contains text and pictures on the top half, and an entire half on the bottom wit just pictures on both sides, which are mainly the original pictures. How should this be fixed? Should the article be reverted back to the original page or should It be edited to encompass some of the less outrageous of the IP editor's captions? BlacknoseDace (talk) 14:26, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The article should be reverted to the original page. Some of the new additional photos could be added to or replace the original ones, especially where we do not have a photo of a genus or where a better photo of a particular genus is available (not that every genus needs a photo here, and there may be a few genera where more than one photo could be appropriate, e.g., large diverse genera such as guenons and macaques).  But right now the article is a mess.  We do not need multiple orangutan or gorilla photos, popular as those genera are, since the extra photos do illustrate anything relevant to this list. This list is not a repository for primate photo - we have Commons for that.Rlendog (talk) 23:00, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Image of Human
I think the image of Human face isn't very perfect for this article. I propose to replace with a human in full posture sitting on the ground. Like, a true homo. Anyone else with me? AXO NOV (talk) ⚑ 11:42, 19 July 2021 (UTC)