Talk:Yak

Plural of Yak
According to my dictionaries, the plural of yak is yaks, with yak as an acceptable alternative. We need to pick a plural for this article. If nobody jumps in with a compelling argument to the contrary, I'm going to make it "yaks." Gary D Robson 16:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Since nobody objected, the change has been made. Gary D Robson 22:00, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Size
Is the domestic yak really only about 1m tall at the shoulders? Apart from the obvious implications for agricultural usefulness, the ones in the photos certainly look much larger. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.8.12.78 (talk) 13:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

Secretion?
This line: "They are insulated by dense, close, matted under-hair as well as their shaggy outer hair. [1] This secretion is used in traditional Nepalese medicine and impregnation" Seems to be missing something.

Valid external links?
These do not appear to meet our external link guidelines. I have moved them here until a consensus shows that editors feel that they do meet guidelines. -- The Red Pen of Doom  21:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

link farm

 * http://www.iucnredlist.org/search/details.php/2892/summ
 * ARKive - images and movies of the wild yak (Bos grunniens)
 * h2g2 Yaks Edited Guide Entry
 * International Yak Association (IYAK)
 * European Yak Association (EYAK)
 * Article on Yak breeds in FAO archives
 * Yaks: The Official Animal of Tibet
 * AnimalInfo.Org: Animal Info - Wild Yak
 * Vermont Yak Company - videos and more

Please check the lead: sizes
"male yaks stand about 2–2.2 meters tall at the shoulder, the females about one third of that size" - these are quite small females, aren't they? NVO (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, the sizes are all over the place. The "one third" for the wild females is actually weight, not height.  I've corrected this, and given sources. The domestic height given of up to 1.8 m cannot be right.  Such an animal would weigh much more than the reffed 580 kg, so I've removed those figures.  Richard New Forest (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Wylie transliteration
A friend with some Tibetan experience suggested that the correct Wylie transliteration is "g.yag". I found some references for this:


 * http://www.library.gov.bt/IT/wylie.html
 * http://places.thlib.org/features#3432
 * https://collab.itc.virginia.edu/access/wiki/site/c06fa8cf-c49c-4ebc-007f-482de5382105/tibetan%20historical%20dictionary%20editorial%20manual.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.231.49.179 (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yak stays an animal
Another IP vandalist vandalized the page and deleted it. SHAME!!! Kingsocarso (talk) 04:03, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Wild Yak vs Domestic Yak
I think there needs to be two different articles for them. Merging wild and domestic Yak is madness. Just look at how the article starts: "...the Yak is "found" as far north as Mongolia and Russia (which one "is found" - the wild or the domestic)? As I understood, the wild Yak is quiet different in size and behaviour, much like the difference between an aurochs or gaur and a modern domesticated cow. So why the merger? It doesn't make any sense. If I do a search for wild cat I am also not being redirected to domestic cat. 78.94.33.52 (talk) 14:40, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

ICZN Ruling
With all due respect to the authors of the references cited, I believe the ICZN ruling that protected the name Bos mutus had the effect of giving it priority over Bos gruniens when a taxon contains the types of both. That means you can have Bos gruniens and Bos mutus, but only Bos mutus gruniens and Bos mutus mutus rather than Bos gruniens mutus and Bos gruniens gruniens. After all, this is the same ruling that protected Bos primigenus over Bos taurus, so following the logic used here, one would expect Bos taurus and Bos indicus instead of Bos primigenius taurus. The ICZN (commission) doesn't rule, as far as I know, on whether something can be referred to as a species vs. a subspecies, but only which name is correct for that species or that subspecies according to the rules. I'm not a zoologist, so I could be wrong- but I have read the ICZN (code) in its entirety. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:05, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Especially note the statement on the bottom of page 83 of the article announcing the decision :

The names listed in the ruling above, which are the first available names in use based on wild populations, apply to wild species and include those for their domestic derivatives if these are not distinguishable.
 * Chuck Entz (talk) 04:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Yak wool
Anything to add about the wool of yak and the clothing made of yak wool or leather? 112.96.97.10 (talk) 06:26, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

No, yaks are not "usually referred to as Bos grunniens."
Yaks are usually referred to as "yaks". The word Yak usually refers to Bos grunniens, but the sentence in the header would be better off rewritten entirely. Which I might do. 172.5.154.148 (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Bos grunniens at Letdar on Annapurna Circuit.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Bos grunniens at Letdar on Annapurna Circuit.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 23, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-02-23. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:19, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Yak meat
Is yak meat eaten? If so, the the article should have a section on such use. Mjroots (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Bos grunniens at Yundrok Yumtso Lake.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Bos grunniens at Yundrok Yumtso Lake.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on September 4, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-09-04. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture -- neither "autonomous" nor "Tibetan"
A subheading of a picture showing a yak notes that the area is the "Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture." This is a name of a locality, but one that deliberatly contains political disinformation.

Given Wikipedia's policy of publishing the truth, rather than disseminating poltical lies and propaganda, I object to the subheading. The prefecture is not Tibetan, in that it is not ruled in any way by Tibetans, or even necessarily populated by Tibetans. Rather, it is ruled by Chinese, who have invaded and occupied Tibet against the manifest will of the indigenous population and then have so swamped the country by Chinese immigration that the Tibetans are now a minority in their own country.

The same argument holds against the "Autonomous" part of the name. In very few ways are even Han Chinese prefectures in China 'autonomous,' and certainly not those of ethnicities other than the Han and never any other than in China proper. As are most peoples around the globe, the Chinese are racists, but unlike other peoples, they have the military power to inflict their wishes on their neigbors.

But the location is still in historic Tibet. Perhaps a different name would be called for. I suggest "Ganzi Provence of Chinese-Occupied Tibet."

64.134.158.137 (talk) 16:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)J.E. Johnson, Oregon


 * The name used should match that at the article on the region. That is, at present, Garzê Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, so that's the one we should use here. If you want it changed, you'll have to discuss re-naming that page at WP:RQM rather than here. We can always adjust this page after consensus is reached at the primary page, if necessary. Anaxial (talk) 17:04, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Split material to wild yak
Wild yak was created yesterday (by ) as a stub. I'm not sure if the editor intended to further develop that article, but I am quite in agreement with a split of yak into separate articles for the domesticated and the wild variant, since these are currently treated as separate species. This had been proposed earlier (see above) but seems to have gone nowhere. In this case, I have been bold and performed a split according to my best ability. I have done the entire thing in a single movement so that it can easily be undone if desired.

I have moved all material pertaining only to wild yaks to the new article; added short summaries together with a 'Main article' link for two sections ("Taxonomy" and "Reproduction"); and added a "Conservation" section. There is substantial overlap between the "Physical characteristics" (yak) and "Description" (wild yak), but I think that might be acceptable. I have also changed the redirect domestic yak to point to yak, for the time being (it used to point to the "Domesticated yak" section in that article).

If the split is retained, I would suggest moving yak to Domestic yak, and linking both articles in Yak (disambiguation).

Comments welcome! -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The article has been moved to domestic yak, to which yak now redirects.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:45, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * But the Wikidata link still points to Bos mutus, either the whole species in biological taxonomy, or the wild form in yours. --Stupid girl (talk) 16:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)


 * You wanna fix it? I don't know my way around Wikidata.-- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 24 May 2021

 * 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: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ~  (t, e &#124; c, l) 14:52, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Domestic yak → Yak – I think Domestic yak should be moved to Yak because it already redirects here. Christiancardenas732 (talk) 19:41, 24 May 2021 (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.
 * Support for simplicity, yak has plenty of incoming links. J I P  &#124; Talk 19:54, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Yak already redirects here, so this article is already considered the primary topic, and "yak" is certainly a more common name. This move is also WP:CONSISTENT with other similar article titles such as Goat and Wild goat, and Water buffalo and Wild water buffalo, with the domestic variety being the primary topic. Rreagan007 (talk) 14:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Support What JIP said. For simplicity's sake. Ms.23 (talk) 18:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I'm not sure that this is primary over Wild yak. Better to create a disambuation page at Yak. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Good point, the proposed change would be similar to Horse vs Wild Horse. Although the current set up is similar to Domestic turkey and Wild turkey. In the turkey case, Turkey (bird) is a page that refers to the different types of turkeys. I don't think a page covering the different types of yaks would be necessary though because there is only one species. --Pithon314 (talk) 21:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think a disambiguation page is a good idea for just two. A hatnote at the top of the Yak article can handle it. In the turkey case, the country Turkey is the primary, and a hatnote directs to the broad concept article at Turkey (bird). Rreagan007 (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * To what Pithon stated about only one species. If it matters, according to the articles, these are two distinct species: Bos grunniens and Bos mutus — Domestic yak and wild yak respectively. Is this not correct? Still just two at most, so I otherwise agree that a disambiguation page is not necessary. --DB1729 (talk) 02:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Support In Nepal, generally when one talks about a Yak, it is a domestic one. nirmal (talk) 08:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Seems like a reasonable move. --DB1729 (talk) 02:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)