Talk:Animal aggression
A fact from Animal aggression appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 October 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
DYK nomination
[edit]Brambleberry of RiverClanmeow 16:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Suggestion
[edit]This is a very nice article. Since it's so nice, can I suggest that you add one point: that predation is not considered aggression in the sense of the term used in the article. Most people would naturally think of predatory attacks as a form of aggression, so I think it's important to make that clear. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- Looie496, I tell you this now: be bold! If you think something needs changing, feel free to change it. The reason that I added some things about predation to certain sections was because of the use of pictures. I needed to have enough text in one section so that a picture did not creep into the next section and disrupt the flow of the other pictures. Brambleberry of RiverClanmeow 16:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. I always try to be careful about trampling on newly created articles, because that can make the editors who worked so hard on them feel frustrated and unappreciated. I'll consider if there is anything I can do. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Looie496. Although this article is well-written and obviously the fruit of a lot of hard work, it is also mostly a misnomer. Aggression occurs between members of a single species (see our article on aggression). When flocks of birds attack a predator to defend their young, that's not aggression. Even within the same species, you wouldn't call that aggression, but defensive behavior or something similar. Many other instances of "aggression" described in the article are simply cases where an animal hunts for food ("predation"). I'm afraid this will need a complete overhaul. I came here because I saw the DYK proposal concerning this article and I think the hook is flawed, too. Rightly or wrongly, those parents were not afraid of "animal aggression", they were concerned about "animal predation"... I also see no good reason to discuss aggression "in all animal species except humans"... Sorry for being grumpy. Just got woken up an hour early by an "aggressive" mosquito that wanted to suck my blood... (I'm happy to report that, in a bout of aggression, I was able to kill it... :-) --Guillaume2303 (talk) 05:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)\
- I have to agree: this article strikes me as conceptually somewhat flawed, if well-documented and long. If the term "animal aggression" is, in fact, a notable biological category of behavior, then the article should probably begin with references to books or journals that define it in encyclopedic terms rather than the terms of the person who first created the article. I get the feeling that the article creator is attempting to define the term "de novo", and that would make it original research (and therefore subject to removal). Also: the article includes clear conceptual errors as it stands: a baby opossum hissing is not a form of animal aggression, it is a form of defense, as are many snake bites inflicted on humans. There has been no attempt here to clearly distinguish defensive and aggressive behaviors, which makes the article of dubious use. KDS4444Talk 04:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. I always try to be careful about trampling on newly created articles, because that can make the editors who worked so hard on them feel frustrated and unappreciated. I'll consider if there is anything I can do. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Homo sapiens not part of Animalia?
[edit]The wording in the intro seems a bit misleading as this focuses on nonhuman animal aggression. "Animals" could be said instead, as Homo sapiens is also part of Animalia but not covered in detail below. 8ty3hree (talk) 03:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- I feel that the aggression article and others in the aggression category sufficiently cover human aggression. Some could say that humans are animals just because they belong in Animalia, and not just the cynics. Brambleberry of RiverClanmeow 13:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- That's exactly my point. The article should not say Animalia as it would imply that human aggression is in the article, which it is not. I am changing it to specify a non-human animal. 8ty3hree (talk) 01:05, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
An omitted form of aggression
[edit]Seen in domestic cats. Kitty sitting and purring while being petted - and suddenly the ears go back, and kitty starts biting, clawing, and kicking with back feet. I think Bruce Fogle discusses this in his "The Cat's Mind" - will try to find the passage for reference and add a short sentence to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Floozybackloves (talk • contribs) 05:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Aggression
[edit]This article mixes up a lot of different behaviors and calls them all "aggression". A tiger attacking and eating a human is not being aggressive, but shows predatory behavior. A hippo fighting with people that attack it is not aggressive either, it is showing defensive behavior. So was probably the rattlesnake biting a human. Aggression is directed towards members of ones own species. A hunter shooting a deer is not showing aggressive behavior, but drunkard looking for a fight in a bar is. I'm not going to be "bold" and work on this article, as I think that it is irredeemable and should be rewritten from scratch. --Randykitty (talk) 16:06, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
- PS: we actually have a much better article on aggression, perhaps this one should be redirected there. --Randykitty (talk) 16:12, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
- Agree I think this is an excellent idea. KDS4444Talk 11:00, 23 December 2012 (UTC)