Talk:List of megafauna discovered in modern times

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Animals Low‑importance

List of megafauna discovered in modern times is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

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

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Removed

Removed "* Platypus Ornithorhynchus anatinus (first specimens returned to Europe in 1700s, and believed to be taxidermical hoax)" from the "Megafauna initially believed to have been fictitious or hoaxes" section. While I'm sure platypi were thought to be hoaxes, they are hardly megafauna. Okapi should probably be removed as well.

Przewalski's Horse

I removed Prezwalski's Horse from this list because according to the information on its page, the population that now exists in the wild was what was released from captivity. It was not discovered.

It was first properly documented in 1881. But you're right, the current population is descended from zoo populations. As usual, locals knew about it all along. --MacRusgail (talk) 14:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Search for "recent", "recently" in Wikipedia the recent encyclopedia

I just typed these words in the search box. Shall those discoveries still be recent when they're 60 years old ?

Please move to "megafauna discovered since 1850, BC" or what you prefer. Thanks. -- DLL ^{.. T} 21:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC) P.S. where's the summary box today ?[reply]

60 years ago is recent. Maybe not to people in America, but certainly to most people. Well within my parents' lifetimes.--MacRusgail (talk) 14:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two Entries for Coelacanth

Is there a reason there are two conflicting entries for the Coelacanth, or is it a silent disagreement between to contributors?CDrecche (talk) 01:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Too small

The birds and muntjacs (except maybe the Giant Muntjac) don't belong here, as they are under 100 lb/45 kg, the most common definition of megafauna.Vultur (talk) 22:13, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any objections?

Any objections to removing the smaller animals from this list? That would probably include the shrew and the birds. Regards, ClovisPt (talk) 22:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Colossal Squid Ross Ice Shelf.jpg

The image File:Colossal Squid Ross Ice Shelf.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --16:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

probably need to AFD this list

There is not a clear definition as what a megafauna species actually is, so since one can not definitively state, and source a specific species as yes or no, it's megafauna, the whole list will probably need to go. See List of megafauna for details Googlemeister (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of megafauna discovered in modern times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:25, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between discovery types

Should there be a separate category for species like Rice's Whale where scientists knew about it, but didn't realize/discover/decide it was a distinct species until recently? Seems like an important enough distinction. 147.226.198.35 (talk) 05:44, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]