Talk:Sperm whale/Archive 2

Euphemistic use of 'taken'?
We're told that calves or weakened adults are 'taken' by pods of orcas. Is there any good reason not to say 'killed', which is what this surely means (since orcas are 'killer' whales)? Or even 'killed and eaten', if that's what they do afterwards - unless they just kill for the fun of it? When I read 'taken' I find myself thinking 'Taken - where to? A film? The zoo?' This strikes me as similar to the mealy-mouthed use of 'passed away' for 'died' - as if people should never be confronted with the harsh facts of life!213.127.210.95 (talk) 14:11, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You're right, 213.127.210.95. Please feel free to edit the article accordingly. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 10:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree too. In fact, in modern use, and especially in a US regulatory context, the word "take" can also mean "disturb" or "harass". Its use is therefore not appropriate here. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 14:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The page is protected due to vandalism. So not easily editable.68.32.115.118 (talk) 22:23, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I fixed it. MrAwesome888 (talk) 02:19, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Size
According to Lockyer's formula in "Growth and Energy Budget for the Sperm Whale," a 20.4 meter (67 foot) sperm whale would weigh on average 97 tonnes, or 107 tons, nearly twice the figure given here for that length. This formula (W=0.006648*L^3.18, W is weight in tonnes, L is length in meters) is based off of actual weighings of sperm whales and includes blood. Since body weight grows exponentially with length, I suspect that the 56 ton figure given here is somewhat conjectural. Another possibility is that it was the actual weight of the largest one weighed, but that this individual was well below the maximum length. (as was the heaviest fin whale weighed, giving a much lower "maximum" weight than what is actually possible.) Edit: This would also mean that a 24.4 meter (80 foot) sperm whale would weigh about 171.5 tonnes (189 tons) and a 25.9 meter (85 foot) whale would weigh about 207.5 tonnes (228.5 tons), which tells me that reports of 80+ foot sperm whales are just gross exaggerations. 60-70 feet is probably the absolute maximum. MrAwesome888 (talk) 02:16, 4 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Well don't everybody start talking at once.
 * MrAwesome888 (talk) 20:55, 15 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Since no one else has responded (and just to let you know that someone does appreciate your input and has read your posting), I offer the following:


 * Yes…, well thank you very much, MrAwesome888. We here at the Chattahoochee Conundrum Center of Counting, Ciphering, and Computation, or as we like to call it "C6" (pronounced "sea sick"), have been preoccupied by our work on Carmichael's totient function conjecture and have only recently assigned a team to investigate your hypothesis. By applying synthetic simulation analysis theory the team is attempting to ascertain whether the viscosity of the water in which the whale is submerged efficiently accounts for the laminar flow of the water over the body of the whale at depths of more than 1000 feet; this, of course, would permit your formula to work in all known instances of sperm whale habitat. While initial results are promising, we are awaiting confirmation from the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Survey, the Jackson Hole Oceanographic Institution (Woods Hole wouldn’t touch the subject!), and our undergraduate research assistant at Snow College in Ephraim, Utah. Presently, we feel highly confident in commending your determination of sperm whale length tending toward a maximum of 70 feet. Thank you, and as Queequeg used to say, "Happy Harpooning!". Ishmael Nantucket aka CobraDragoon (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Sperm whale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/archives/05-06/mar18.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081007174536/http://www.wdcs.org/submissions_bin/rmsreview.pdf to http://www.wdcs.org/submissions_bin/rmsreview.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.70south.com/resources/antarctic-animals/whales
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/community/guide/lihistory/ny-history-hs9phys%2C0%2C4763989.story?coll=ny-lihostory-navigation
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.whaletrackers.com/whales-mediterranean-sea/sperm-whales-of-greece/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:00, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sperm whale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150106152733/https://www.marinemammalscience.org/species-information/list-of-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/ to https://www.marinemammalscience.org/species-information/list-of-marine-mammal-species-subspecies
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140512231728/http://www.e-shiretoko.com/news013.html to http://www.e-shiretoko.com/news013.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2017
4.1 Distribution update Since 2010 are Sperm Whales regularly seen around Sri Lanka, mostly near Alankuda located in Kalpitiya peninsula where continental shelf is approx. 12km from the shore. Dlabacm (talk) 16:31, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 16:36, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sperm whale. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516101558/http://www.coreresearch.org/education/offshorespecies.htm to http://www.coreresearch.org/education/offshorespecies.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303225021/https://sv361.xserver.jp/~tes-sev/kohkaimaru.com/?photo_gallery&l=1 to https://sv361.xserver.jp/~tes-sev/kohkaimaru.com/?photo_gallery&l=1
 * Added tag to ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/x9293e/x9293e00.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Sperm whale maximum weight
In Guinness book of animal facts and feats is quoted in page 30 this :"at least 80 tonnes", for the biggest male ever captured which was 20,7m. https://archive.org/stream/guinnessbookofan00wood#page/29/mode/2up/search/moose — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.48.210.235 (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2018
In the subsection Diet of the section Ecology, Octopoteuthis should be linked.2A02:C7D:1E0C:0:2D32:5122:6C0B:9168 (talk) 15:52, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done. Rivertorch FIREWATER  18:04, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2018
Please remove the 3D model captioned "Sperm whale jaw 3d", it is obviously incorrect because sperm whales have two rows of teeth in their lower jaws (like every other toothed vertebrate) 128.189.204.121 (talk) 17:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. &mdash;  LeoFrank   Talk 09:20, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

do you agree that the model is wrong? 128.189.200.29 (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree, I hadn't noticed this had snuck onto the page again. A correct model of half a lower mandible (what this purports to be) would actually be useful and informative; however, this is clearly a type of bas-relief merely mirrored in the x-y plane. It's the kind of 3D model you get when you extrapolate from a 2D model without extra data, and it's insufficient at best and actively misleading at worst. We had some discussions about identically produced models recently (WikiProject_Dinosaurs/Image_review) and consensus was that they are unsuitable for use in articles. I am removing this one. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:44, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

=== moby dick

Is it a coincidence that Moby dick is a sperm whale? === — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.234.101.26 (talk) 18:12, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Historical population non sequitur.
historic worldwide population numbered 1,100,000 before commercial sperm whaling began in the early eighteenth century.[3] By 1880 it had declined by an estimated 29 percent.[3] From that date until 1946, the population appears to have partially recovered as whaling activity decreased, and after World War II, the whale population increases to 33 percent of the pre-whaling population.Bold text . The preceding is not possible as stated. A number cannot decease by 29%, then hold steady or gain slightly and end up at only 33% of the original. The narrative does not follow. The references provided link just to Wikipedia page about the endangered species act. I'm not sure where the numbers are from, so I don't feel like I have enough information to correct or improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BGriffin (talk • contribs) 19:17, 23 July 2019 (UTC) , still with the same source that doesn't give the numbers. CyreJ (talk) 19:50, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In the past (i.e. a random version from 2010 I looked at because the blame tool isn't working), it said declined "[...] By 1880 it had declined an estimated 29 per cent.[2] From that date until 1946 the population appears to have recovered somewhat as whaling pressure lessened, but after the Second World War, the population declined even further, to only 33 per cent of the pre-whaling era.[2][...]"
 * changing back to "decrease" as this one obviously makes more sense, even though there's no source for either CyreJ (talk) 10:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Prehensile Penis?
This unusual musculature should be described in some detail for all aquatic mammals, as a correct body positioning in the water (for successful copulation) may be more difficult to obtain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homebuilding (talk • contribs) 14:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Minor Edit Request: In taxonomy side bar please change the order of sperm whale from "Artiodactyla" to "Cetartiodactyla".
This is a request for a minor edit to the taxonomy side bar of sperm whale: please change the order of sperm whale from "Artiodactyla" to "Cetartiodactyla".

More details: The side bar listing the taxonomy of sperm whale was confusing to me the first time I looked at it, as the name of the order listed in the sidebar is "Artiodactyla". However in the taxonomy section, the text states the order as "Cetartiodactyla". This was especially confusing because I was trying to do a quick comparison between the order of sperm whale and dolphin and a quick look using only the taxonomy sidebar showed me different orders for the two related species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:F900:57B0:2815:E9D4:708E:1ABB (talk) 00:00, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Diving physiology and adaptations
The sperm whale is notable fo diving capability and physiological adaptation, but I see very little in the article about this aspect. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:39, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Found it under Sperm whale. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 18:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Broken link
At the end of 6.2 Relations with other species there is a broken link to the article on minke whales.

Redsoxfan2495 (talk) 21:07, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed.  Grey joy talk 09:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Typo in McClain et. al paper on sperm whale size distribution
Hello, in the Size, section, I noticed an issue with the statement cited from McClain et. al that 95% of sperm whales were below 15 meters. Even though that claim is pulled directly from the paper's discussion section, it's actually inconsistent with the data from the figures. Table 3 shows that the 95th percentile size from the IWC data is 15.85 meters, with 15.50m at 90%, and 14.3m at 75%. We can also look at the histogram in Figure 34 and clearly see that more than 5% of the measured catches were beyond the 15-meter mark. From eyeballing it, it seems at least ~76,000 sperm whales measured beyond 15 meters. That would roughly equal about 15% of sperm whales measured. Now given how that sentence in the discussion still cites 14.3 meters as the 75% percentile size, it's still clearly referring to the sample presented in the study. It can be concluded that the 15-meter/95th percentile claim is a typo. It was probably intended to say that 95% of measured sperm whales were below 16 meters or maybe 85% were below 15 meters. In hindsight, this makes sense given that even modern photogrammetry supports that the average bull sperm whale physically matures at a length beyond 15 meters. Therefore, it would be odd a little odd that within the historical size distribution of sperm whales, that only 5% of the individuals actually achieved this length. 15% makes more sense, and when calculating from a male-only sample, this would likely yield an even larger number.

So anyway, that claim regarding the 95th-percentile length for sperm whales should probably be changed to 15.85 meters, citing the figures rather than the discussion. If anyone noticed something I missed in this, let me know.
 * I think you're correct. Issues like this come up a lot, unfortunately. I think we can change the number to 15.85m and still be citing the source correctly. I'll have a go at rewriting the section.Steveoc 86 (talk) 12:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Article issues
This article has issues with its size, citation and etc. Unlike other GA cetacean articles, this one has a big problem including FA Humpback whale. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:58ED:9A2:3A1A:9A5C (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC) ‎