Talk:Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin

Hong Kong Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.Hong KongWikipedia:WikiProject Hong KongTemplate:WikiProject Hong KongHong Kong articles

Low

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

Hong Kong To-do:

Attention needed (60)

...needing expert attention (4) • ...without infoboxes (18)

Collaboration needed

Recommend topic

Improvement needed

GA-Class articles (60) • B-Class articles (295)

Cleanup needed

C-Class articles (1,054)

Image needed (348)

Destub needed

Start-Class articles (5,475) • Stub-Class articles (6,684)

Deorphan needed

...orphans

Page creation needed

Requested articles

Miscellaneous tasks

...maintain popularity • ...assess the un-Class (388) • ...assess the un-Importance (1,337)

Cetaceans (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cetaceans, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CetaceansWikipedia:WikiProject CetaceansTemplate:WikiProject CetaceansCetaceans articles

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

Untitled

If it's generally considered as a subspecies, as the intro says, shouldn't the scientific name have three words in it? Namely, Sousa chinensis __?__. --Menchi 23:43 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)

And I Googled a bit & found nothing. --Menchi 23:43 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I assumed it was the nominate race, and I've confirmed that from two sources now. jimfbleak 05:31 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Except that the intro now says its a full species, so shouldn't the scientific name have just two words in it? They can't both be right... Anaxial (talk) 12:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Broken link from article:

香港鯨豚網

Knee-jerk editing?

I see that someone jumped in and edited this article based on the mass-media news reports today. I'll admit these reports were my own inspiration for looking up this article, however I was surprised to discover that this species exists throughout Asia and not just in one river in China as the news has been reporting. Since that was apparently the only place that the search was taking place, it would seem the demise of the dolphins may be greatly exaggerated (to paragraph Mr. Twain). Do others feel that the reports of are perhaps influenced by politics rather then science and that the article here should be adjusted to be a bit more objective?

Wrong dolphin, it's the Baiji that has been declared functionally extinct. Extinction revoked.

    I reverted the edits Ericzundel 20:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was me. If you mean the yahoo! artical. I may have reaf it wrong but, the way I read it was that they were extinct every where. Penubag 04:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)penubag[reply]

That's the wrong dolphin. The dolphin that's now extinct is the Chinese River Dolphin. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I bielieve you. BTW, not a knee-jerk.Penubag 02:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)Penubag.GO CHINESE WHITE DOLPHIN FIGHT THAT THREAETNINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![reply]

Pink dolphins of the Gulf of Thailand

It seems like the "pink dolphins" of the Gulf of Thailand (esp Khanom) are this subspecies. And they can apparently be more pink rather than the pink-grey described in the article. Images search - pink dolphin Khanom. See also http://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/thread.jspa?threadID=1840346 - but I don't have a proper source (or the time to look) so I won't edit the article. --Chriswaterguy talk 18:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"grieving mother" claim

This statement is beyond silly, "A tour guide from Hong Kong Dolphinwatch spotted a group of pink dolphins helping a grieving mother support the body of her dead calf above the water in an attempt to revive it." It needs to be removed. Nobody knows if the dolphin was "grieving" or not and this anthropomorphic assertion should be edited OUT if Wikipedia doesn't want to lose credibility with anyone who's had even one science class.

"Humans and the environment" section

This section looks like it was cut'n'pasted from a news article (perhaps the one cited at the end of the paragraph?), e.g., "Conservationists warned Monday..." and needs to be reworded and perhaps additional citations given. --zandperl (talk) 05:24, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus on species status?

The article currently states that the Chinese white dolphin is a variety of Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins, but not a unique species. Recent genetic studies indicate that, rather than a variety, it is a species in its own right. The article also makes reference to this and uses the name Sousa chinensis. We should determine what the scientific consensus of the species/variety is and alter the article accordingly. Since the major studies have been published, the IUCN and Society of Marine Mammalogy have recognized Sousa chinensis as a unique species.

There does seem to be some confusion over the naming though. The Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin on Wikipedia is typically called the Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea) in literature. The Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin often refers to Sousa chinensis in literature. As the article is currently written, it makes it sound like Sousa chinensis is a variety of Sousa plumbea. I think that we should move this page to Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, which will be about Sousa chinensis, and the other article be changed to Indian Ocean humpback dolphin (Sousa plumbea). WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would support this. This article seems to have clarified the status of these species. And both ITIS and Mammal Diversity Database, which we have accepted as the best sources for such matters at WP:PRIMATE until MSW4 is released, both accept this classification. As for common names, I think the various sources in consensus on using Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin for S. chinenis. S. plumbea is less clear. Mammal Diversity Database does not provide a common name, while ITIS uses Indian humpback dolphin. As a result, since ITIS has more general applicability than the Society of Marine Mammalogy, I would for now go with Indian humpback dolphin, but with the proviso that if another name starts gaining consensus in the literature we have no issue with moving to that new name at that time. Rlendog (talk) 15:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for providing those links. I also agree with your proposal to use Indian humpback dolphin for the other page until clearer scientific consensus is reached. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 01:11, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, "Indian Ocean humpback dolphin" seems to be more prevalent than "Indian humpback dolphin" based on a Google search, so I would probably go with that as a provisionary title, ITIS notwithstanding. I'd wait a couple more days to see if there is any more feedback here and then start a move request. Rlendog (talk) 15:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 April 2019

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 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:21, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese white dolphin → Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin – The Chinese white dolphin is a subspecies of Sousa chinensis. The Taiwanese population also covered here is another subspecies. Ergo, this page should be moved to describe Sousa chinensis. The linked page refers to a different species of dolphin sometimes referred to as the Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphin. The IUCN, scientific literature, the Society of Marine Mammalogy, ITIS and others use Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphin for Sousa chinensis. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 20:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. feminist (talk) 04:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)--Relisting. Cúchullain ^t/c 13:26, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose moving for technical reasons. The page redirects to Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphin, so it will be easier to move that article. Support merging with Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin after Indo-Pacific humpbacked dolphin is moved there. Iamnotabunny (talk) 08:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator's comment I've relisted this move now that the other article has been moved to Indian Ocean humpback dolphin.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:26, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, now that any technical reasons not to have been addressed. Rlendog (talk) 18:30, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - we can't do anything about the common name proliferation, but we can at least mirror prevalent usage here. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:08, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

@WhiteArcticWolf: please could you update this article in line with the move? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:24, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]