Talk:Pampas cat

Uncited text
Uncited text removed, please add the text back in the article if you can provide cites, see WP:CITE. ---96.229.184.69 (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose that Colocolo be merged into Pampas cat. These two articles describe the same species in different ways. Quetzal1964 (talk)  16:43, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The merge (and by extension the proposal) were too hurried and unfortunate, because some users considered both species (Leopardus colocolo/a and Leopardus pajeros) as the same. However, several studies concluded in different definitions, and finally, in 2020 concluded both species are different. Some users considered keeping both species into one article "less confusing" back in 2017 (at the momento of the merge), but is is just the opposite. I thing those articles should never been merged. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Latin name
IUCN Red List use the latin name "Leopardus colocolo". Spanish and portuguese Wikipedia uses "Leopardus pajeros". English Wikipedia uses "Leopardus colocola". So which one is the right latin name? Phillipm0703 (talk) 07:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This species has been split into multiple species on occasion and whether it is a single species or several is subject to debate. This article treats the Pamapas cat as a single species, Leopardus colocolo, with Leopardus colocolo pajeros as a subspecies, following the IUCN Specialist Cat Group classification of Felidae. Other taxonomic treatments consider Leopardus pajeros and Leopardus braccatus as distinct species (e.g. Mammal Species of the World, 3rd edition). Other Wikipedias may follow different taxonomic treatments. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 08:41, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The problem is that when treated as a single species, the common names Colocolo, Pampas Cat and Pantanal Cat all apply to the single species, as a whole or in part of the range. In the MSW3 treatment, these names are applied to Leopardus colocolo, Leopardus pajeros and Leopardus braccatus, respectively. The Spanish and Portuguese Wikipedias have separate articles for the three species. To avoid confusion, I think this article should be moved to Colocolo. Using the Latin names might be better but Wikipedia prefers common names. —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 08:57, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I would support a move to either Colocolo or to Leopardus colocolo for clarity. While using the scientific name isn't generally done for feliforms, it's a fairly common practice for other species with problematic namings. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, the scientific name would be the best title for this article. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This would serve as a precedent for using the scientific name for other species. Without a naming policy about taxons (unlike the Spanish Wikipedia), this would be a disaster. This should be discussed at the Village Pump. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I can support that. The status of this species or group of species is going to change so scientific names will make things clear. A page move needs to be made over a redirect, though.
 * The other thing to consider is Wikipedia common names policy. It is not what many people think: use a vernacular name over the scientific name. The policy is to use the most commonly used name, which can be the scientific name, especially when there are several common names over different parts of range. Moreover, the page titles are meant to be unambiguous as far as possible. A page on the taxon name will always be about that taxon name andn can discuss alternative circumscriptions, which is part of taxonomy. A page on a vernacular name can refer to different things (e.g this example) and cannot discuss alternative uses of the name with the same objectivity (e.g. we can't use Pampas cat sensu lato and Pampas cat sensu stricto in the way we can with taxon names). —  Jts1882 &#124; talk 19:30, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * And besides the one-species or three-species debate, there's recently been a five-species proposal that seems to have been accepted- I've seen repeated references to the five species used in the past three years or so since it was made. While I know we should wait until the IUCN accepts the split (the Mammal Diversity Database already has), we should keep in mind that such a split would require reworking of the entire article (and the related Pantanal cat article). And none of those five species are just called the pampas cat, IIRC, under the split, so I support the proposed move to the scientific name. SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:06, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we don't need to discuss MSW3, as this has been obsolete since 2017. – BhagyaMani (talk) 05:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Indeed. ASM's MDD, in conjunction with the IUCN Redlist, is our primary guidance these days. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:04, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we should NOT move the page to a title with a Latin name. For two reasons: 1) if the present taxonomy is insecure, pending and still debated, we can indicate and reference this accordingly on the page. And move it later, if the cat is given a new name + once this will have been sorted out, e.g. in the next update of the respective IUCN Red List, where changes in taxonomy need to be addressed. 2) the pageview statistics indicate 43,753 views between Aug 2022 and July 2023 with a monthly average of 3,646 views. So quite a bit! Lets keep this page reader friendly i.e. easy to find by a) refraining from frequent page moves and b) keep using a vernacular name as title for species. After all, there is lots of other interesting and relevant info on this page apart from taxonomic issues! – BhagyaMani (talk) 05:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * A fair argument. But since we've started the discussion, I'm going to open a formal WP:RM. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:05, 11 August 2023 (UTC)


 * There is a recent genetic study here that more or less supports the findings of Kitchener et al 2017 which forms the basis of the IUCN Cat groups listings, so as per the comments of . In summary its one species with up to five subspecies. Personal observation is that as per many mammal groups particularly in South America and Africa they are oversplit ad-infinitum. As such I support moving everything to a species page under the scientific species name "Leopardus colocolo" and discussing the various subspecies under this, the common names being used are attched to the various subspecies, such as Colucolo and Pampas Cat etc not the species. As such these are not technically species group common names. This lacks accuracy on what is being referred to by these common names. Cheers Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 13:10, 11 August 2023

*If no one minds I wanted to take the opportunity to explain some of my reasoning here. My vote for the move below remains unchanged but I did not want to put this in the middle of it.
 * Ok the history here is that for a long time this taxon has been split into two genera with numerous species. With recent molecular analysis it has had several synonymisations done. The name L. colocola has the common name of Colocola and the name L. pajeros has the common name of Pampas Cat. Unfortunately the less well known taxon is the oldest name and hence under nomenclature is the valid name. This means the species has the name of the senior taxon for a common name, though the subspecies will still carry their respective common names.
 * As a taxonomist I have had to many times deal with these scenarios and they are annoying, but seniority prevails and the common names should be more correctly assigned to the taxon they were referring to.
 * My overall suggestion here is to accept that the common names are confusing and messed up by the changes in the taxonomy. Do not keep any subspecies pages either, make one very good article that goes over each subspecies within its discussions as well as full explanations of the taxonomic changes, with references. I think as an encyclopedia you will be providing a greater informational service by taking this route. For the title use the scientific name and have every common name for each subspecies redirect to it. You have a confusing situation beyond anyones control, my professional view is this makes the best of it.(UTC) see below Cheers Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 16:13, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 11 August 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) SilverLocust 💬 14:14, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Pampas cat → Leopardus colocola – Current situation is influx, using the scientific name will help clarify things. UtherSRG (talk) 12:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Cats has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 12:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Mammals has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 12:07, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose for reasons outlined in my previous comment: 1) taxonomic issues + debates need to be addressed whichever the page title is; 2) keep title consistent with naming conventions for species and hence stable + reader friendly. – BhagyaMani (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - in my previous comment I noted the recent taxonomic works. There will be no new names with this taxon, just arrangements and these will be below the level of species if at all. The current page name is a reference to the subspecies name not the species name as such it is actually innacurate. The IUCN list is current and for cats will not be updated in the near future, probably around 10 years. The title using the scientific name may not be completely in keeping with the accepted style but neither is having the incorrect common name on the species. The Pampas cat is not the same as the scientific name here it is only one of the subspecies. - Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 14:20, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Change to Oppose sorry I have done some more reading of all the lit on this (I am a turtle taxonomist so had to do some catch up) and have to change my view. None of the recent papers are referring to each other effectively and there is no cognicent path in the development of the taxonomy. The IUCN last assessed these taxa in 2016 so its unlikely to be done again in the near future (they average every 10 years), but until someone does a complete review its better to leave it as it is and follow Kitchinger 2017 the most recent reasonable review that is followed by the IUCN and I believe CITES I will check on this with their Taxonomic Working Group. I have struck my previous comments. Cheers Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 18:25, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * CITES is using the IUCN Cat Specialist Group also for info. Cheers Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 18:38, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * for info a collegue who is on the CITES Taxonomy Group and also the GSLWG with me sent me this summary for interest.
 * Cat SG 2017 recognises L. jacobitus, L. pardalis (with valid sspp pardalis and mitis), L. wiedii (sspp wiedii and glauculus. possibly vigens), colalolo (definite typical subspecies, braccatus and pajeros, sinking crespoi, crucunis & thomasi, undecided on sspp budini, garleppi, munoai, steinbachi and wolfsoghni), L. guttulus, L. tigrinus (sspp tigrinus & oncilla), L. geoffroyi, L. guigna,
 * So this is the official IUCN and CITES Position. Cheers Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 18:42, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and BhagyaMani's detailed reasoning in the thread above this one.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  15:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Problem is the Pampas Cat is the common name of Leopardus colocola pajeros ie one of the subspecies, the correct common name for the parent species Leopardis colocola is the Colocola, so under the proposal of using WP:COMMONNAME the correct name would be Colocola, which is probably not so well known. Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 15:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Could a split solve this?★Trekker (talk) 15:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * In theory yes but you would need to make pages for all five subspecies, some more well known than others. So will depend on the work wanted. This is an unfortunate result of two genera being synonimised, it happens but we have to live with it. Scott Thomson  ( Faendalimas ) talk 15:29, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose because of the taxonomic confusion surrounding this species. While the most recent proposal, a split into five species in 2021 seems to be gaining acceptance (a check of GScholar reveals use of the five species is one the rise since 2021) WikiProject Mammal's rule for lumps/splits is to wait for MDD and IUCN to agree. The MDD has adopted the split, the IUCN hasn't and I don't know if they'll be updating the cats anytime soon. Note that both this article and the Pantanal cat article will likely need updating. But for now, "Pampas cat" is a sufficient title for this species complex. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:34, 11 August 2023 (UTC)