Jump to content

Talk:Granny (orca)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Granny (orca)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 12:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First reading

[edit]
  • In general the article is well written and arranged, but a few points struck me as I read it:
  • The lead paragraph is quite short yet contains seven citations. In general, the lead is meant to be a summary of the rest of the article and shouldn't contain any material not mentioned in the body of the text, so the citations should be in the main article, not the lead. See MOS Lead
  • The second paragraph is given the section heading "Description" but this does not describe most of its contents.
  • You could slightly expand the part about recognition of individual animals as readers may be unfamiliar with this concept.
  • "scientists believed him to be Granny's last offspring, her own age was estimated at about 60." - Do you mean "most recent offspring" or last offspring because the whale is now too old to reproduce?
  • "They have completed a journey as far as 800 miles in a week." - Perhaps "travelled" would be better here. This statement needs a citation.
  • "According to researchers, Granny also has multiple grandchildren and great-grandchildren travelling in the pod with her." - Citation needed here too.
  • Who is Piddock and why does what he say deserve attention?
  • The Piddock quote needs a citation.
  • "Additionally, Granny and her family are at risk from declining West Coast salmon populations." - Another sentence that needs a citation.
  • That's all for the time being. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cwmhiraeth Thanks for the review, sorry I didn't see it until you pinged me. I will go through it more thoroughly, and see what I can clean up. Gaijin42 (talk) 12:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No action has been taken on any of the points I raised above. However I believe that the GA criteria are broadly met by this article and some of the points I raised are trivial. So I have improved the referencing by adding citations for several statements and I now believe the article reaches the GA criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth Thanks. I apologize for not taking any action on your review, I have not been as active in wikipedia for the past few weeks, and your review had slipped my mind. I appreciate you looping back and fixing some of the elements yourself. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Claims by Piddock/Accuracy of estimates

[edit]

There are a couple of issues here, first is the claim by this guy Piddock that pictures exist from the late 30s. Has anyone seen these pictures? Or are we just trusting the claims of a guy who sells his whale watching tours? Secondly the nature of these estimates is just that. We dont know the exact ages of these animals they are based upon extrapolation and assumptions which could be wrong. What if the male were not her offspring? The article takes a lot of things on faith and presents it as fact. Batvette (talk) 23:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC) Batvette (talk) 23:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent Death

[edit]

According to several new sources Granny is considered deceased. I have added this at the end of the intro paragraph with some reference links [1] [2]

I am unsure of best practices at this point. I just thought to update to the most recent available news. Bpendragon (talk) 01:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.king5.com/news/local/oldest-southern-resident-killer-whale-considered-dead/381349614
  2. ^ http://www.whaleresearch.com/j2

ITN Nomination

[edit]

{{ITN note|RD: Granny (orca)|date=3 January 2017}} Dragons flight (talk) 11:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dragons flight: thanks for the nom. Glad it was posted. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:30, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Age

[edit]

What does "105±12 years old" mean? I can't be the only one to find this confusing.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It means plus or minus twelve years ( so between 93 and 117 years old). It's a common way of expressing mathematical margins of error - I'll try and clarify this in the article ASAP. JezGrove (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1930s photograph

[edit]

J2's age is a matter of some dispute in the scientific community, so I tried to better reflect that in the article. There are claims of a 1930s photograph of J2 in a couple news articles, but the reference appears to be circular; I cannot find the original source of the 1930s photograph, nor can I find the photograph itself; it appears to be something picked up from other secondary sources. Titanium Dragon (talk) 06:11, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 May 2019

[edit]
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: See Talk:Chimo_(killer_whale)#Requested move 27 May 2019 Interstellarity T 🌟 21:56, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

– Consistent with killer whale. Interstellarity (talk) 16:29, 27 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.

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Chimo (killer whale) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:01, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That one has now been closed and the summary points back here for the result. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening the move discussion

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Query has been made appropriately at Wikipedia_talk:Requested_moves#Help_needed:_Orca/Killer_whale_discussions. —В²C ☎ 22:15, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone reopen the move discussion above? I don't know how to do that. I want to do this because on this move discussion, there seems to be consensus to use the (killer whale) disambiguator for the article titles. Interstellarity T 🌟 11:10, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for assistance at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves. Honestly I would have just let the last discussion run its course, it's really not helpful to keep closing these discussions and restarting them elsewhere. PC78 (talk) 13:25, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@PC78: I have created three discussions (1, 2, 3). I apologize for any mistakes I made. In the future, I will try to open one discussion and decide on the outcome there. Interstellarity T 🌟 13:37, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Sario528: I noticed you marked this help me request as answered, but did not provide an answer. In the future, when you mark help me requests as answered, please provide an answer. It really helps. Thank you, Interstellarity T 🌟 19:07, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Is anyone else a bit confused as to what is going on here, or is it just me? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An answer was provided, and I agree with it. This matter has been listed at requested moves (RM); moves agreed through that process will be made by the closing volunteer. I have closed off the {{Help me}}. AGK ■ 21:33, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you agree, wherever that was. So we don't have three discussions any more, after all? What's the closing volunteer going to close, sorry? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:40, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ah yes, OK, thanks. .. "see X" where X is another closed one saying "See Y", where Y is ...... um possibly, (I think). Martinevans123 (talk) 22:19, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of captive orcas which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 March 2022

[edit]
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 all. Current consensus Talk:Orca#Requested move 25 January 2022 is clear. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sawol (talk) 07:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

– Consistency with orca now being the page name, and with the just-moved Tilikum (orca). This will encompass as many pages as applies CreecregofLife (talk) 15:15, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah “killer whale” as informal as it may be, just feels so antiquated--CreecregofLife (talk) 00:06, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Natural wild orca lifespans are equivalent to that of humans"

[edit]

This quote is based on maximum estimates of 75 years for males and 80 years for females. These however do not represent average life expectancy. I generally tend to question using activist organisations, like the Orca Network, as sources instead of actual studies. 79.167.158.42 (talk) 07:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Granny's DOB

[edit]

The discussion of age in the article is a little confused and doesn't closely track the only source [1] (Podt) that appears to discuss it. The scholarly source [2] argues that the 1911 estimate is too early but doesn't give any explicit counter estimate that I can see. In particular the 65–80 range apparently taken from Podt would seem to indicate a DOB of c.1935-1951 not "c.1950's". Podt claims the 65–80 range is based on a published report of a scientific biopsy there is no inline citation. Could it be "Adaptive prolonged postreproductive life span in killer whales – E.A. Foster, D.W. Franks, S. Mazzi, S.K. Darden, K.C. Balcomb, J.K.B. Ford, D.P. Croft – Science Vol 337, 2012"? Podt later suggests that a date as late as c.1961 is possible, though in my opinion, that would conflict with the evidence of her capture and release in 1967. Is there a good/recent academic citation for that event? I.e. that Granny was with the group that was captured and was released due to her age/size and not that she was simply not with the group at that time. My personal analysis of the evidence is that she may well have been born in the early 1930's or before based on the fact that she had no documented calves in 1971 or later, but that's just WP:OR. In any event disputed facts should be cited to the best possible sources which in this case are academic articles and not popular science rewrites of Orca Network press releases.

I will go ahead and make a couple of edits to bring the article closer to what Podt specifically says, but remain hopeful that additional and better sources may be found. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:46, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Granny_(orca)&oldid=1258068852"