Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Animals/Archive 6

Sus
It has been brought to our attention that Sus seems biased towards the domesticated pigs and bears little information on wild pigs. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_life. Thanks, Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 02:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Why would it be listed at WikiProject Tree of Life?? Also the link should be Pig Zoo  Pro  07:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The anonymous IP who reported it first reported it at Tree of Life. I was only making you the related projects aware of the issue. Feel free to carry on at this page. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 03:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The problem remains and there is edit warring on the article and Pig (disambiguation) as well. Basically, the article with page name Pig is about the pig genus Sus but for some editors "pig" means domestic pig. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 16:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Zoo Pro  12:39, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

New creatures?
Did a search on all the creatures listed in this page, national geographic, cannot find them in Wikipedia. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 17:07, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not all of them are formally described yet, but yes, these are just a few of the so many articles we ought to have. Of these, I only know of this article, which I created. &mdash;innotata 17:17, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Shortly after the bizarre frogfish from Maluku was discovered, I did a writeup on it, and was told to move it to my userspace until it had been officially described. The Tree of Life WikiProject prefers all species presented on Wikipedia are officially described species-- that is, someone has to have given it a scientific name and a description in a scientific publication. Keep a careful eye out, like I did, and you might notice the paper when it gets published (if it does). I kept an eye out for over a year before I was finally able to release Psychedelic frogfish into the mainspace. Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 03:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Table of contents
Why does this page have no table of contents? 69.3.72.249 (talk) 15:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And now it does. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 16:04, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Zoo Pro  12:34, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Gallbladder
What I really came here to do: ask you all to expand the section of Gallbladder re non-human animals. Or spin that off as a separate article. The absence of this organ is an important character in several groups: certain rodents and certain artiodactyls. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * A lot of the anatomy articles are majorly anthropocentric - I've been adding bits here and there, and I've got my sights set on a major revision of hyoid, but if you see an omission, add it in, even just as a "comparative" subheading which can be expanded later. Every little bit helps. Mokele (talk) 16:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Will do. I have just started expanding Bladder from a redirect to (human) Urinary bladder into a broader article.  Not sure yet whether it should be urinary bladder compared among all animals, all bladders ditto, or expand the scope to include plant bladders too.  See also the contested move request now at Talk:Bladder (disambiguation).  69.3.72.249 (talk) 16:59, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ . Zoo  Pro  12:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Angaria depressa or Modulus tectum?
At the Wikimedia Commons, we have received a request for "commons:File:Angaria depressa.shell001.jpg" to be renamed "Modulus tectum". Can a knowledgeable editor please comment on the matter at "commons:File talk:Angaria depressa.shell001.jpg"? Thanks. — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 13:29, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ by User:Innotata . Zoo  Pro  12:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Animal articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Animal articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:29, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Reactivation of WikiProject Veterinary Medicine
I am interested in re-activating WikiProject Veterinary Medicine, particularly when I saw another user recently post this same idea on the project page. If you're interested and/or you have a great idea for jump-starting the revitalization, stop by here. --Kleopatra (talk) 01:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheers, I was involved in the re-activation of a number of animal related projects some time ago and have some experience in what needs to be done, if you need a hand please dont hesitate to contact me either here or on my talk page. Cheers Zoo  Pro  02:09, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Zoo  Pro  12:33, 5 January 2011 (UTC)