Talk:Wild boar

Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wild boar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 12 months

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 9, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed

Mammals Mid‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Agriculture Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and drink Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Southeast Asia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anthropology: Oral tradition

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by Oral tradition taskforce.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 16 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brinturner, Josephlinger, Zackattack932.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

"sounders" and "matriarchy"

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

the first time the word "sounders" occurs, it should be explained. and the article says "female dominated sounders" with a link at "female dominated" to "matriarchy", which is about human beings, not pigs. This linkage is either ignorant or a form of original research by someone who really wants to compare human matriarchies with groups of wild pigs. --142.163.194.161 (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

References for setosus

Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion

@BhagyaMani The Boddaert citation isn't adequate to explain synonymy. This is the original description, but for it to be considered synonymous with scrofa there needs to a taxonomic review. Thus the additional source given. I am not sure why that citation was described as incomplete. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:33, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

A source without an author, year, publisher or journal is incomplete. The proper ref for synonyms is anyway MSW 3, unless a later revised taxonomy was published. – BhagyaMani (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure how that response addresses the issue. It appears that you are stating that setosus is not a vaid synonym. If that is the case it needs to be removed. I was happy to keep it, but it needed at least some valid reference to support it. Could you please supply a response to state why you think that setosus should remain, but without any valid citation. Also please explain the removal of the citation provided, instead of completing it if you think that it doesn't meet particular standards. Also there are no guidelines that I am aware of that state that a citation must have the characteristics that you claim. This is the recommended citation from the site in question "Sus setosus in GBIF Secretariat (2022). GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/39omei accessed via GBIF.org on 2022-12-23.". It states its source is TAXREF "Gargominy O (2022). TAXREF. Version 4.9. UMS PatriNat (OFB-CNRS-MNHN), Paris. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/vqueam accessed via GBIF.org on 2022-12-23.".

I would be helpful if you could explain yourself further. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

According to MSW 3, setosus is a syn of the nominate subspecies, hence not of the species, see ^[1] Therefore I moved this entry. – BhagyaMani (talk) 16:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

References

^ Grubb, P. (2005). "Subspecies Sus scrofa scrofa". In Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed.). Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 637–722. ISBN 978-0-8018-8221-0. OCLC 62265494.

Terminology

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Could someone knowledgeable on the subject take a look at this section please. The first sentence seems vague, a couple of common confusions could do with clarification; the gender issue (acceptability of 'wild boar sow') and the plural issue ('wild boar' and 'wild boars'). Many thanks Obscurasky (talk) 14:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

I am not sure what the confusion is. Boar and boars are both used as the plural form. What is acceptable in English is generally up to which audience you are aiming at. If you find 'wild boar sow' cumbersome then don't use it. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Could be nominated for good article

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I see regular editors here have done an impressive job and if one of you is interested I think it is ready for Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions Chidgk1 (talk) 17:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic

[1] Grubb, P. (2005). "Subspecies Sus scrofa scrofa". In Wilson, D.E.; Reeder, D.M (eds.). Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed.). Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 637–722. ISBN 978-0-8018-8221-0. OCLC 62265494.

[1]