Jump to content

Talk:North Atlantic right whale

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

Ok, may I please finally put this notion to rest. The Basques did not deplete the stock(s) of right whales in the Bay of Biscay and then go searching the North Atlantic for new whaling grounds. At the same time as they were sailing to Terranova (Newfoundland and Labrador), Spitsbergen, Iceland, Brazil, and Northern Norway in the 16th and 17th centuries there was still a profitable winter fishery off the coast of northern Spain. It wasn't until after these other areas had been visited that whaling in the Bay of Biscay began to decline. Jonas Poole (talk) 23:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Human-Predation Influences

[edit]

I received a privately-communicated editing challenge that I think belongs here in Talk for the good of the Article. SaberToothWhale wrote to me "Hi. Could you provide a scientific paper that says whaling wasn't the cause of the current low numbers in the North Atlantic? The news article you cited wasn't on the topic at hand and wasn't supported by any evidence. I understood it that the above claim only referred to whaling in the western North Atlantic, not the entire ocean basin. If you can't provide said reference, I will have to revert your edit. Good day." Among other issues I have with that approach is the attempt to frame the issue as whether I can produce "a scientific paper" and that the consequence of any failure woud be to "revert" my edit. Proper WP approach would have been to first acknowledge that the Environment Editor of the BBC (the author and publisher of my source) is a "credible source" on a relevant issue; and that the burden of proof re any reversion lies with the person seeking to revert. SaberToothWhale does not cite or provide any basis for why my edit contravenes WP policy. In my own editing discussions, I seek to engage any editor in a discussion to see whether we can arrive at Article text that presents properly any relevant, credible-source information. I some editor thinks that the word "western" ought be added to the text "Atlantic Ocean" then WP:BeBold and do it. Or engage in cooperative efforts to otherwise improve the Article. To further that end, I point out that cited content need not be flagged by the title of a source and that the source need not itself cite its "evidence". I suggest that the article can be improved by those with the subject matter skills to know what a better source might be. Let's try that rather than have an edit war based on personal policies rather than WP policies.SteveO1951 (talk) 00:52, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than discuss here, or follow WP editing guidelines, SaberToothWhale simply deleted my addition, stating in his/her comment "source provided no evidence for statement, which only applied to certain time period (16th century) in certain region." That a credible source (BBC) did not specify the source of the "recent research" is not basis for removal under WP policies WP:RS. If an editor wishes to correct/add detail that he thinks appropriate then let that editor do so. WP policies require Talk and attempt to improve the Article, not deletion.SteveO1951 (talk) 18:55, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had done some copy edit. I appreciate that SaberToothWhale has replaced that by discovering the important scientific study and adding to the Article a better statement of the matter and a direct reference.SteveO1951 (talk) 05:28, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]

I'm not sure when the following was inserted rather randomly into the lead:

The North Alantic Right Whale are endangered due to their swimming course. When they regulary travel through a course, they pass the U.S.Navy Military Sonar training. Sonar Training is a device used to track war submarines underwater. When the waves from the Sonar activates, the waves may deafen North Alantic Right Whales and other animals eardrums. The other animals consist of dolphins, belugas, and other marine animals. Their hearing loss can result in getting hit by a ship due to their lack of attention or hearing.If you want more info on how to help these whales, please go to http://www.nrdc.org/action

But it is obviously inappropriate and I removed it. Some of this information might be included in a "Current status/threats" section further down, but only if it is rewritten and sourced reliably. Best, Eliezg (talk) 22:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, studies are still inconclusive regarding the effects of Military Sonar. The data is not consistant and new studies need to be carried out in order to make a correct finding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.122.79.238 (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOAA hears North Alantic Right Whales.

[edit]

Someone should make use of the following news about North Atlantic Right Whales:

NOAA (2009-05-21). "NOAA Expedition Hears Endangered North Atlantic Right Whales off Greenland". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrration. Retrieved 2009-05-21.--DThomsen8 (talk) 01:44, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Name

[edit]

Shouldn't this page be at North Atlantic Right Whale according to the project page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Cetaceans, capital initial letters are agreed upon by consensus. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 23:00, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cetaceans#Capitalisation. Current consensus is to use sentence casing as is overwhelmingly common in relevant literature. --Swift (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CETA capitalisation discussion

[edit]

Weight-to-length ratio of largest recorded specimen suspicious.

[edit]

"'Adult right whales average 45–55 feet (14–17 m) in length and weigh up to seventy tons (63,500 kg); 

the largest measured specimens have been 60 feet (18 m) long and 117 tons (106,000 kg).'"

If line 1 is correct, Taking the upper average length of 55 feet (17 m) and assuming that would be 70 tons (63.5 metric tons),

then: 60 feet divided by 55 feet = 1.091 1.091 cubed = 1.299 1.299 x 63.5 metric tons = 82.5 metric tons

In short, a 60 foot (18m) individual with the same weight-to length ratio as the upper average should weigh 90.75 tons (82.5 metric tons)

On the other hand, if line 2 is correct, then: 55 feet divided by 60 feet = .917 .917 cubed = .771 .771 X 106 metric tons = 81.75 metric tons

IE: a 55 foot individual with the same weight-to-length ratio as the largest specimen should weigh 90 tons (81.75 metric tons, not 70 tons (63.5 metric tons) Jdaniel314 (talk) 18:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply] 

 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdaniel314 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Endangered Status

[edit]

I feel this should be included in the wikipedia entry for this mammal:

Feb 17 - In response to the efforts of conservation and wildlife protection groups, the National Marine Fisheries Service proposed to protect 39,655 square miles as critical habitat for North Atlantic right whales. Only about 450 of the critically endangered whales exist today, and without additional protections the species faces a serious risk of extinction.


Sources:

[1]

[2]

References

  1. ^ http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2015-02-15/story/feds-proposing-larger-critical-habitat-zone-right-whales-florida-georgia
  2. ^ http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2015/north-atlantic-right-whale-02-17-2015.html

Recent sightings - original research

[edit]

A number of the entries in the "recent sightings" table are poorly sourced. A blog titled "WHO HAS AN IDEA WHAT ANIMAL WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE?" is an unreliable, primary source and isn't suitable for Wikipedia. We shouldn't be collating amateur reports of sightings, but recording what reliable sources report. I propose that the more poorly sourced entries be removed from the list. Pburka (talk) 02:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Atlantic right whale. 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) 00:25, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on North Atlantic right whale. 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) 23:44, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on North Atlantic right whale. 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) 19:51, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Historical Mediterranean Presence

[edit]

Subsection 6.3 (Eastern Population) of the page states that it is hypothesised that some North Atlantic Right Whales might have historically summered or wintered in the Mediterranean Sea, but that there is no evidence. Could this study identifying North Atlantic Right Whale bones in ancient Mediterranean settlements suffice as sufficient evidence? http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/285/1882/20180961 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.201.17.114 (talk) 02:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place to advertise, even for good causes

[edit]

I have deleted multiple things telling how readers can report whale sightings, as this is incredible unencyclopedic.

I would also recommend that editors check to make sure undue weight isn't given to certain environmental nonprofits. I found a couple examples of this, and the talk page contains clear evidence of NRDC vandalism in the past (see Lead section), so this is something we must look out for. Toad02 (talk) 19:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked into it more, and I believe the editor who added a bit of extra eight to the NRDC in relation to a legal case is actually an established editor called SaltWolf, who is almost certainly not just an NRDC advertiser. I think this shows that we need to be on guard against nonprofits twisting facts to make themselves seem more relevant.Toad02 (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: ENGW3303 Adv Writing for Environmental Professions 14387

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 8 September 2023 and 12 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): EcoBear13 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by EcoBear13 (talk) 19:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Planned edits on climate change and UME

[edit]

Hi, as you can see above I am working on this article for a class this fall. I'll be updating the threats//climate change section with new data and reporting and tightening up the language, as well as updating the 2017 Unusual Mortality Section to reflect the link between climate change and the 2017 UME. EcoBear13 (talk) 19:53, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Functional extinction?

[edit]

Since the source for NOAA is currently dead, I tried to find an updated version as surely the information that "may already be functionally extinct" would be included right? Turns out.... NOAA does have a page on the North Atlantic right whale [1] but nowhere in the article does it mention "functionally extinct". A google search however, does give "Some scientists say that the North Atlantic right whale could be functionally extinct by 2035 or 2040 if current trends continue" as an answer with additional sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:North_Atlantic_right_whale&oldid=1250639186"