Talk:Elephant/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

The article should say that evolutionists don't have a clue how the elephant family came to be

The article should say that evolutionnist don't have a clue how the elephant family came to be. I cite the following:

Elephants have long been known to be excellent swimmers,1 even to the point of using their trunks as breathing snorkels. Now some Australian biologists are promoting the theory that the evolutionary ancestors of elephants spent millions of years as aquatic animals.2 This of course flies in the face of previously ‘certain’ beliefs about ‘elephant evolution’. [1]

ken 17:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)kdbuffalo

First off, the cited source is "answersingenesis.org". Hardly a reliable, peer-reviewed source. But, even still, there's no controversy here, just a misunderstanding of the scientific method, and an over-simplification of the origin of species. Nothing to see here. -Harmil 19:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Elephant attacks?

We have Crocodile attacks and Alligator attacks in Florida, but no Elephant attacks. This excellent NYT article might be a good source to get started. "An Elephant Crackup?", .. "Attacks by elephants on villages, people and other animals are on the rise. Some researchers are pointing to a species-wide trauma and the fraying of the fabric of pachyderm society."

(cc: Talk:Crushing by elephant)

--Stbalbach 01:52, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

grammar/spelling

I noticed some spelling errors and questionable grammar, but I can't change anything. Just a reminder for someone who can to please do so. thank you. 129.173.185.68 18:41, 12 October 2006 (UTC)MikeD

You could try copying the article's source code into Elephant/temp, changing it, and using {{editprotected}} to request that it be copied back. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 17:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not going to work for two reasons - 1. subpages cannot be created in the article namespace, and 2. IP users cannot create new articles.

Instead detail your concerns here please. Thanks/wangi 20:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, you could try registering, copying the article's source code into a page whose name looks like a subpage but isn't (or does this violate policy?), and making changes there. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 02:51, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

If you're going to register, you might as well simply do it in user space. I'm not sure what you mean by "looks like a subpage," but if you mean writing a page at Elephant/temp, then yes, this is frowned upon. But this is all likely to be a moot point, as I doubt the page will continue to be protected past today. JDoorjam Talk 15:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Asian elephant in picture

Augienism has been trying to note that the picture in the African elephant section is an Asian elephant, but the edit keeps getting reverted as vandalism. The elephant is an Asian elephant. The small ears are the give-away, but you can also just click on the image and go to the Web site of the photographer. It was photographed in India. -Harmil 04:06, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Discrepancy in the population estimates of asian elephants.

40000 total asian elephants - 36000 mainland elephants = 4000 other species.

But the population of Sumatran sub-species is listed as 33000-53000. This is wrong math. I could only guess that it is 3300-5300.

requested edit

since i can't edit the page right now (thanks, stephen colbert), will someone who can change "trunk-hole" to "nasal cavity" (or "trunk-hole", that would be fine too) in the section Religion and philosophy? thanks in advance. 67.68.207.52 07:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

oh, and can someone also add a link to mirror test in the section on self-awareness? thanks again. 67.68.207.52 07:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

one more! in the section on varieties, Motty ought to be linked. 67.68.207.52 07:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

One more edit

I am a registered user and still I am not able to make an edit. So I sugest the following addition about adding some references. Somebody who can make changes please incorporate these: In the evolution section about the trunk please add this reference:

Also add this: Elephants are the only mammals that do not have a pleural space. Even though the early fetus has a pleural cavity, the pleural cavity is obliterated during late gestation by connective tissue. This has been suggested as a evolutionary selection to prevent pleural vascular rupture due to sever negative pressure for underwater inspiratory efforts though the large dead-space of the trunk.

Thanks --Dr.saptarshi 03:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Add Edit On Self Awareness Explanation.

Research Scientist Anwar Matar Hasan suggests that elephant self awareness might have been a conditioned ability as well as the evolutionary aspect in the larger brain size and intelligence of elephants. Elephants drink water from lakes or other water bodies using their trunk. This causes less disturbance on the water surface than other animals who drink using their mouths. Consiquently, they are more able to see their reflection in the water. Over time, unlike other animals, this has conditioned them to recognise, and understand the aspects of reflection.

Credit goes to Research Scientist Anwar Matar Hasan at Keele University, North Staffordshire, UK.

Please add this as a possible explanation to Elephant self awareness.

You can add it yourself, but only if you provide a link to a published reliable source for it. -- Donald Albury 16:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

if this is true for elephants, it must also be true of Bottlenose dolphins..since they see their reflection when they come out of the water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.140.44 (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Self Awareness

If anybody is interested in the orignal article on Elephants and the mirror test, see:

J. M. Plotnik, F. B. M. de Waal & D. Reiss, Self-recognition in an Asian elephant, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, November 7 2006, vol. 103, issue 45, page 17053–17057.

(Note the new section in the WP article about this. This is certainly interesting!)

--Delta Tango • Talk 07:54, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

elephants looking in mirrors

The elephant page is locked and there was an elephant related story in the news this week. Elephants can recognize themselves in the mirror. I think it should be added to the elphant page.

Do you have a source for this? -- Cielomobile ^{talk / contribs} 17:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Not only is it verifiable, it's already in the article. See Elephant#Self-awareness and the discussion sections immediately above this one. -- Vary | Talk 18:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Female troops?

So, the elephant page says only males were war elephants but the war elephant page say either one. Anyone *know* which it is? (Also posted to war elephant talk.) Nklatt 15:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Would be nice to know their hearing range

A web search completely fails on that aspect. Dog and Cat articles have detailed sections on the animal's senses, but not elephant. Stephen Colbert is partially responsible for this article's failure. Anomo 06:34, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Use of Pachyderm is Polyphyletic

The link to Pachydermata states that the term Pachyderm is an outdated phyletic group. Indeed, it is Polyphyletic, a pitfall that most phylogenists choose to avoid. Is it possible to move the reference to "Pachyderm" to another part of the article, perhaps in the "Humanity and Elephants?"

Sure, go for it. JDoorjam Talk 06:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Age?

It would be nice for the article to have section about ages of elephants, for both African and Asian elephants. The lead section just mentions they can live longer than 70 years but does not provide any source or further information. It would be a useful thing to include some references to ages and how long elephants can be expected to live. Thanks. Ekantik 02:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Elephant Rage

I took the liberty of moving the picture of Tyke the elephant down from the "Musth" section to "Other causes", as per that article, Tyke was female.

The other causes section is very scant, right now, and does not mention abuse or personality issues in any way. If anyone who actually knows anything about elephants (unlike me) could expand that with some good, NPOV material, that would help. Blurble 19:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Below posting by Manukarnika The article on elephant rage talks about elephants killing people in India. The truth is...in the name of Temple festivals, elephants are being mistreated. They get prodded and injured with an iron spear, they are made to walk on tar roads at 50 degree Centigrade temperature, during festivals they are hardly fed and kept in overcrowded enclosures. Sometimes elephants are in Musth, yet used on these parades. Under such horrible conditions if elephants lose their cool and turn on people, who is to blame the elephants?

Here are some news items on the topic http://www.hindu.com/2007/03/26/stories/2007032600910200.htm http://www.hindu.com/2007/04/20/stories/2007042001410200.htm

Recently an elephant named Avittathore Muralikrishna (grand name, but sorry life) overworked for 3 days in festivals fell down unable to board a Truck and died in the middle of the road after a few hours of trumpeting for help. The elephant was later found to have had many injuries on its body. http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1088057

Posted by manukarnika

Hi. If a photo of Tyke is posted, you have to add some context -- this was a captive, abused elephant, not some inexplicably raging elephant being restrained on a rampage. Please add context or reference your own Wikipedia entry on Tyke.

Not sure why verbiage re: "rage and vindictiveness being elephants' nature" was allowed (the one reference you have is flimsy). They do get mad when threatened, abused, chained, held in captivity, just like we would be (sorry for the common sense pov). Lots of references on rage and other negative behavior from abused, captive, chained elephants. References: http://www.elephants.com/joanna/Bradshaw&Lindner_PTSD-rev.pdf, http://www.captiveanimals.org/elephants/skegness2.htmhttp://www.elephantcountryweb.com/ellies14.html, http://www.animaldefense.com/Circus.htmlhttp://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=carson_barnes_long http://blog.peta.org/archives/2007/12/former_ringling.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by 215Tr (talk • contribs) 20:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey.

I just wanted to know what would happen if (by some strange aphrodisiac) the population of elephants actually does triple. oTHErONE _(Contribs) 13:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Obviously this would be a very good thing. The world needs more elephants. In a perfect universe, the Earth would be populated by nothing but elephants, a fact often cited by TNEC (The National Elephant Council). Alas, this will probably never happen, because mankind is evil, industry is bad, etc. etc. etc. MGlosenger 23:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Nothing but elephants? Wouldn't they starve without the occasional rabbit? --A Good Anon 06:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

elephants dont eat rabbits...?

If the world was populated with nothing but elephants and rabbits, I bet they would.

The Rampaging Elephants

I herd male Elephants attack cities in giant herds, bite peoples heads off, and spit them out on female Elephants bodies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.91.253.1 (talk) 23:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

I heard they get drunk off beer.[[2]] Vranak 02:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Standard versus Imperial

I have noticed sometimes the standard units are listed first with the imperial following, and other times it is vice versa. Any thoughts on the idea of the article being edited so that it is standardized as always one or the other first? --

Mourning

I saw a French TV news piece last year showing elephants sad over the death of a fellow elephant. Please create a section in the article. They are so much like humans. Chivista 15:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd second this. I remember hearing in a documentary about how elephants were aware of their own mortality and their attitude and rituals towards death. I came to this article to find out more about this. Whether it's true or not, I think it deserves a mention. 82.34.235.168 22:32, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I've seen this also - they often linger around a dead elephant, and have even been known to take tusks with them as mementos and kind of "cherish" them in the same way we would --leopheard 10:26, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Stephen Colbert controversy

On his nightly show on January 29, 2007, the host Steven Colbert called on his viewers to change the elephant entry to say that elephant population has tripled. As a result many editors have vandalized this cite. A better place for this is in an article on the reliability of information on sites like wikipedia, not the elephant site. At most a link or referral to the other article as elephants are not related to the efforts of Stephen Colbert -- only vandalism is related to his efforts. Chivista 15:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC) I have changed my spelling to excise my typos. :( Chivista 19:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I would hate to leave wikipedia in your hands, Chivista, if you can't even spell the words "artcile" or "vandfalism." Gregorywhiffleton 19:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

LOL Mach Seventy 23:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this is true anyways. 'The Word' was in fact about 'Wikiality' and he did mention that some viewers have since edited Wiki to say "that the elephant population has tripled". He also mentioned that this happened about a week ago if I remember correctly. He did not "urge" his viewers to continue to vandalize this "cite". He did, though, urge them to change the entry 'Reality' to say "Reality has become a commodity", but it was already locked before, which I'm sure his researchers checked beforehand. Ironic Camel

This episode with Colbert using the manipulation of the Elephant entry as an illustration of the maleability of facts, or "reality", as definined in Wikipedia is pretty significant. It seems to merit a mention in the "Popular Culture" section of the entry. Hoopla-pdx 05:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I havn't seen anything about Steven Colbert in this article, which is wierd since Wikipedia tries very hard to stop him. I know Wiki probably doesn't like him constantly pointing out how easy it is to change something into 'wikiality', but I think, right now anyways, he might be a tad more popular than "Dumbo" Ironic Camel 31 January 2007 EDIT: Why was this topic moved to the bottom?

"Why was this topic moved to the bottom?" - see the guidelines --Spiffy sperry 17:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The reason he isn't mentioned is because the vandalism has nothing to do with elephants. The vandalism is to the elephant article. In this case, information about this prank of his can be mentioned on the Stephen Colbert or Colbert Report or Wikipedia article, but not on the Elephant article because it has absolutely nothing to do with actual elephants. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 11:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

This is not the point of the "prank" - the point is that "reality has become a commodity". The truth is that whatever people say to be true becomes the truth. This prank was really silly - it didn't do anything. However, if nobody edited it, or if everyone agreed to it, the text itself would have become the truth, regardless of the facts. If we wanted to believe that there were three times the number of elephants, there would be, as far as most people are concerned. He's just pointing out the hypocracy of a website that governs through general consensus to determine validity. Ironically, this is also the best way of presenting information in the most accurate and precise method. -- 75.38.114.55 05:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Accurate and Precise? Unlikely, and redundant. Wikipedia is far from accurate.

Accuracy and Precision are not redundant terms. For example, a thermometer that measured to a tenth of a degree but is always reading 10 degrees warmer than the real temperature would be more precise but less accurate than a thermometer that measured only to the nearest degree but had a margin of error of only 3 degrees. Thus, we can call the first thermometer more precise and the second thermometer more accurate. The difference is subtle but awesome.

I believe that the Colbert Controversy should be included in the "Popular Culture" section of the elephant article.

It's a shame the article has had to be protected because of thus. It would be nice to add to the article the recent discovery that the MRCA of all elephants lived 7.6 MYA. 85.92.173.186 10:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

New Species, The Stegodont

Here is an article I found

LIVING STEGODONT OR GENETIC FREAK? (C) Copyright Ben S. Roesch 1995

(Copyrighted content removed. JDoorjam JDiscourse 22:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC))

Isn't linking to copyrighted material perfectly legal? Hemidemisemiquaver 18:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Elephant toes?

Do elephants have toes/ fingers?

Thanks

87.180.242.203 11:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

No, they have hooves. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.37.7.247 (talk) 21:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

do they have nails? hoove nails?

thanks

Elephants n people

Do we have this sec on how many people they kill per year, a little stat box would b good--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 21:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Lions eating Elephants

I just saw this Ngeo film Deadly enemies or something like that. It had 1 female lion trying to kill a Bull elephant. They said it was the boldest attempt in the history of nature. can we add a link to this film or would that b a vio of policy? 1 little lion on a bull elephants back trying to eat him. the elephant didnt even know. we need more info on this activity--HalaTruth(ሐላቃህ) 00:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC) i found a sample: [sample of elephant almost getting eaten by lions 7]

unfortunately national geographic contains a fair share of sensationalism. it is not uncommon for a lion to attack a baby elephant and it is not 'so incredibly rare' for a group to attack a large elephant if they are hungry enough. --AlexOvShaolin 18:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

YEAH, I doubt we can witness the boldest attempt in the history of nature, considering nature has existed for over a million years. - EGreg

Only a million? News to me... Theamazingzeno 23:37, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

"Nature has existed for over a million years" Hahahah, that's classic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.40 (talk) 13:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Baby Motty

In this article it is said that he died 12 days after birth, he was born 7/11/78 (Walley) and died 7/21/78 (Walley). that is ten days. this should be corrected. just letting you know. the page I received my information from was: http://www.hybridelephant.com/motty.html and they would definatly know what's up with Motty.

Babyfire 01:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Deaths by elephants in India

I am skeptical about the unsourced statements "They can go on unexpected bouts of rage, and can be vindictive. In India, up to 30 people are killed weekly by the raging elephants." I was able to find one source [3] that mentioned that 239 humans were killed by elephants in Assam in the past 5 years. That's a little less than one person per week. Now, there are 28 states in India, but if Assam has more elephants than India's other states (as the same article claims), then it seems fairly unlikely that all of the rest of India's states have more deaths by elephant than Assam does. So I'm just going to remove that sentence. The information that follows describes unexpected behavior and things that can be interpreted as rage, but, at least unsourced, I am think the word "vindictive" is a little anthropomorphic. Enuja 02:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Elephants do take revenge - this is from some article from the web this week thousands of people fled a village in Jharkhand after elephants kept returning for what appeared to be revenge raids after the death of a member of the herd. Indian officials say the villagers did not kill the elephant, a 17-year-old female. They say she strayed out of the forest into the village, fell into an irrigation ditch and drowned. The villagers gave her a respectful burial three days ago, but ever since the herd has attacked the village. "We have not slept for three days and the few of us left are lighting huge bonfires to keep the elephants at bay without success," one villager, Sambhu Mahato, told reporters. The figure of 30 a week is not correct, but there are 200 humans killed in India every year. Half of that is from chance encounters in the forest - an elephant, not driven by hunger, will imediately attack human in forest, and try to kill him. They are more dangerous in the wild than lons tigers or bears, as lions tigers or bears kill out of hunger, and elephants do not - they know humans for their agression, and hate them, deliberately trying to kill them. Tame elephants kill out of revenge in circuces, and in musth in India. There are hundreds of deaths from deliberate attacks on villages by wild elephants, and they are always planned, motivated and deliberate violence, coming from the human elephant conflict. AristoDoga 16:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

this website doesnt tell me how long elephants tusk get and that was my question.

Art?

Wait they use art? is there any evidence of it? Any examples or articles on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.70.254 (talk • contribs) 22:39, April 16, 2007

Elephants and the Savuti lions

Did y'all know about this image?. I assumed the lions were just checking out the carcass and added a comment, but today saw WP's stuff about elephant-killing lions. I couldn't find the pic or any more about it on the source site (tho there are related pics) or in the German Wikipedia article where it was posted. I'm trying not to extend my Wiki-streeeetch any further, so I'll leave this to someone keen, but looks worth following up and also asking photographers for additional details.

Enjoy! Lazy-bones aka JackyR | Talk 18:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Questions

Howdy folks! I'm new to this wikipedia thing, but I have a couple of questions about the elephant, if they have answers, perhaps it deserves a spot of the article pullup! Oh yeah!

• When can the unfriendly elephant bind its knowledge?
• How can the disastrous purge storm behind the ashcan?
• Why does the finished elephant flame the indicator ellyphant?

Many thankies, MorningRazor 15:54, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

No offence but your questions look like they have been generated by a computer generating gramatically correct but sematically meaningless sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.66.240.75 (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Can elephants get amnesia? Techboy UK 17:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Time to triple population

Colbert said that the population tripled in 6 months.... Which leads me to wonder how long would it take for the population to triple considering ideal cirucmstances...

Given the information in the article... The gestation period is 22months, the animals generally reproduce every 5 years and the animals reach sexual maturity in 9 years... Given that half of the current population is male and that future births would also be half male... How long would it take to triple the elephant population...

Currently my best estitmate puts it around 10 years. Please include graph.207.157.13.2 15:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.157.13.2 (talk) 15:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

The Gold Seal Campaign

For the sake of Wikipedia and controversial articles...

Gold Seal Campaign:

What do you think of this? The administrators of Wikipedia establish a Gold Seal campaign for certain articles. This “Gold Seal” will indicate for a given article it’s factuality and lack of vandalism. Basically it will show..

1-This page is properly cited.

2-This page has been verified.

This will be an important step for Wikipedia. It means students, high school included will be able to cite Wikipedia in their work. As of now many schools do not allow students to this.

As for editing an article, It will still be allowed yet a person can easily revert to the Gold Sealed, verified page on Wikipedia. This will be an amazing step for Wikipedia, though difficult, it will allow readers to know for sure what they are reading is true. It will surely improve Wikipedia’s image in the public sphere. Of course someone will have to organize this, but in then it will be sufficient use of labour.

It already exists: Wikipedia:Featured articles. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 02:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Colbert and protection

Is it really necessary to protect the page again? Titanium Dragon 04:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so either, but how about a volunteer to take out that miscreant Stephen Colbert!?! --leopheard 10:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

How about finding out his IP address and sending him a warning? Jeffrey.Kleykamp 12:37, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I was kinda kidding, but you could try, but it was most likely a researcher from his programme. Even so, you'd probably get a full segment re: your warning on the Colbert_Report! --leopheard 12:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Cool! I'll see what I can do. Jeffrey.Kleykamp 13:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

If you get a mention on the Colbert I'd a) love to see it & b) be very impressed! --leopheard 12:40, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Y'all probably should keep it protected. I just came by here to see if it was still protected to, so I could add something about how the elephant population had tripled. Yeah, big Colbert fan here.