Jump to content

Talk:Orca/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Interspecies Courtship section?

This section seems to have nothing to do with courtship and the phrase "involve no violation" I do not understand at all. Can this section be clarified?--Jrm2007 (talk) 02:14, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

@Jrm2007: That does seem like something was lost in translation. The two other sources cited in that section are facebook pages. I feel like this section will probably have to be deleted until more reliable sources are found. What do you think? – FenixFeather (talk)(Contribs) 23:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
It certainly reads like a very bad translation. While it's apparent that the section is talking about killer whales' non-predatory interactions with other species, the title would suggest attempts at romance or hybridization. And then there is the problem of how facebook groups are not considered reliable or reputable sources for Wikipedia articles. We should just delete the section for now.--Mr Fink (talk) 00:47, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Intelligence

Half the intelligence section is anecdotes from one book. It's not exactly scientific like the other parts of the section. Does anybody object to me removing it? Hollth (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:CETA capitalisation discussion

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Swift (talk • contribs) 21:53, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Conservation

The Killer whale is listed on Appendix II[1] of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). It is listed on Appendix II[1] as it has an unfavourable conservation status or would benefit significantly from international co-operation organised by tailored agreements. In addition, Killer whale is covered by the Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas (ASCOBANS), the Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans in the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area (ACCOBAMS), the Memorandum of Understanding for the Conservation of Cetaceans and Their Habitats in the Pacific Islands Region (Pacific Cetaceans MOU) and the Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Conservation of the Manatee and Small Cetaceans of Western Africa and Macaronesia.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Water manager (talk • contribs) 15:22, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

  1. ^ a b "Appendix II" of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). As amended by the Conference of the Parties in 1985, 1988, 1991, 1994, 1997, 1999, 2002, 2005 and 2008. Effective: 5th March 2009.

Evolution

The evolution of the sympatric speciation events is an important part of the killer whale's history. There is strong evidence that historically the Earth’s killer whale population went through a severe genetic bottleneck around 145,000 to 200,000 years ago.[1] It is predicted that this bottleneck event occurred as a result of some sort of drastic weather and/or climate change. However the speciation of the killer whales has proved to have preserved a large amount of the variability in the mitochondrial DNA within populations globally—which is unusual following a bottleneck event. The speciation is also supported by the geographical findings in the last few decades in which both the transient and residential ecotypes have been spotted in the same regions of the world in which most of these populations are found in residence near the Pacific waters and off the coast of Alaska. Despite their being within close proximity of one another, the varying diets between the transient and residential killer whale populations has since decreased the need to compete for resources and therefore almost eliminates the need to interact with the other population. This also enhances the speciation even more so because of limited interaction. In the social context of killer whales, continuing the use of vocal sounds between pods has helped maintain the concept of staying within one’s own pod. This proves the successful avoidance of excessive inbreeding in the natal pods. The separation of natal pods in general also strengthens the speciation event. Individuals more like one another, but not genetically identical, are kept closer together and are more likely to remain there thus creating a social separation between subspecies.

It is also evident that these separate subspecies have begun to diverge into even smaller subgroups based on genetic differences as well. [2]This indicates that there is enough genetic similarities between subspecies to allow for further unique patterns to emerge in these smaller subgroups. Gravelle.8111 (talk) 00:33, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
  1. ^ Morin, P. A., F. I. Archer, A. D. Foote, J. Vilstrup, E. E. Allen, P. Wade, J. Durban, K. Parsons, R. Pitman, L. Li, P. Bouffard, S. C. Abel Nielsen, M. Rasmussen, E. Willerslev, M. T. P. Gilbert, and T. Harkins. Complete Mitochondrial Genome Phylogeographic Analysis of Killer Whales (Orcinus Orca) Indicates Multiple Species. Genome Research 20.7 (2010): 908-16. Pub Med Central.
  2. ^ Barrett-Lennard, Lance. Population Structure and Mating Patterns of Killer Whales (Orcinus Orca) As Revelaed By DNA Analysis. (2000): 40-55. University of British Columbia.

Bite force

Some says stronger bite than saltwater crocodile but some said not measured?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Spinosaurus75 (Dinosaur Fan) (talk • contribs) 13:25, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2015

This is a request to add the following citation to support the sentence "Females breed until age 40":

Quantifying the effects of prey abundance on killer whale reproduction Eric J. Ward, Elizabeth E. Holmes and Ken C. Balcomb Journal of Applied Ecology 2009, 46, 632–640 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01647.x

available at: https://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/protectedresources/whales/killerwhales/articles/ward_holmes_balcomb_preyabundance09.pdf

74.71.10.7 (talk) 04:05, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Done. Greedo8 19:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


Requested move 19 June 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 12:57, 27 June 2015 (UTC)


Killer whale → Orca – I am aware of the previous name dispute in 2009, where the long-standing (2003-2009) consensus regarding the article's name Orca was abandoned. Regardless of the controversial conclusion drawn from responses at the time, I'm more concerned with the faulty reason that called for the move. One certain source was repeatedly worshiped as the source we should always follow; appealing to a higher authority instead of relying on Wikipedia's WP:COMMONNAME. I do not have moral objections to either name. Merely practical ones.

Why a move is necessary

  • Recognizability – Google Scholar shows overwhelmingly that Killer Whale was the standard in scientific journals from 1970-1999, where some might think we should draw the article name from. And yet clearly this heavily used archaic term has been replaced by a modern common name that everyone can understand. Orca is by far the most recognizable name.
  • Naturalness – Google Trends show the uncontested popularity of Orca. The sole spike in killer whale was in 2010 when an incident occurred wherein a female trainer [killed by an orca].
  • Precision – I believe it goes without saying that while "a killer whale" could be used to refer to any dangerous whale–..or is it a dolphin? This name will only cause more disputes–the term "orca" is entirely unambiguous and neutral.
  • Conciseness – "Orca" is no longer than necessary to identify the article's subject and distinguish it from other subjects.

Last and least, The scientific term is Orcinus orca, not the far more simple Orca.
Bataaf van Oranje (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Survey

  • Support. Simplicity. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Regretfully oppose. Much as I prefer the name orca, it fails our core naming criterion: which name is more common in reliable sources? The answer in this case is killer whale. Searching Google Scholar for "orcas are" (to filter out uses of the scientific name and various acronyms) since 2000 only gives 321 results, while "killer whales are" gives 1,350. Similarly, a Google n-gram comparison of the two terms shows a clear, though diminishing, preference for killer whales. On the other hand, a Google News search (which I won't link because I'm getting lazy now) shows the opposite, much as the Google Trends data you cited does. However, I think that for a biology topic like this, books and scientific journals are a much better guide than news articles.
You paint a very stark contrast when you say that killer whale is an "archaic term", while orca is a "modern common name that everyone can understand". If that were true, so much the better (as I said, I personally prefer orca). But the evidence strongly suggests it's not.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
comment: And we can not call those species "false orca," "pygmy orca," or "pilot dolphin" without egregious original research synthesis.--Mr Fink (talk) 03:33, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The most common name is "killer whale", and the much of the push for "orca" comes from people who think that it's somehow bad to refer to one of the most efficient carnivores on the planet as a "killer". Luckily that's not the standard for article titles. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 05:39, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Sympathetic neutral - I get what you're saying, and I love me a good concise title, but WP:RECOGNIZABLE is policy, too. Red Slash 18:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


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.

Pliny interpretation

I see we are quoting Pliny concerning "Orcas":

In Western cultures, killer whales were historically feared as dangerous, savage predators.[188] The first written description of a killer whale was given by Pliny the Elder circa AD 70, who wrote, "Orcas (the appearance of which no image can express, other than an enormous mass of savage flesh with teeth) are the enemy of [other whales]... they charge and pierce them like warships ramming."[189]

Our citation is simply to Pliny, a primary source. I think we should be cautious. I am thinking that interpreters are NOT confident of what the original classical "orcas" were.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Life Span issue after reading wikipedia article Captive killer whales

According to this wikipedia article the lifespan of an Orca in capativity is on average less. However there are a few problems with this claim, namely I don't think it is from a peer reviewed journal, although it does look well referenced. It is also quite old, 1995 is a long time and there has been more recent research since then which should probably be included. There needs to be more referencing, and better referencing, and perhaps a display of arguments from both sides to keep neutrality (unless of course one side is making claims with no evidence).

On Captive killer whales a 2015 study from the Journal of Mammology is cited, which says that on the whole the life span between wild and captive whales is the same. However like here there are numerous problems, firstly it is only one reference to support the claims and what is cited is not the Journal of Mammology but instead someone citing the Journal of Mammology. The actual reference just takes you to some media outlet (who's understanding of academic journals is not usually the best) saying that Killer whales in the wild and in captivity liv for the same amount of time.

Here's another 2015 article showing that captive orca live shorter lives than wild ones: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mms.12225/full 2602:302:D13C:58E0:1564:1316:E94E:422D (talk) 14:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC) What needs to be done is for wikipedians to view several journals and come to an academic consensus on the matter to ensure continuity between Killer Whale articles.

I have also posted this in the talk section of the Captive killer whales page

I am not saying one side is right and one side is wrong, just that one side has one improperly cited article (need more than one and proper reference), and the other side has research from 1995 by people who could be said to have vested interests (and still need more sources from different journals). (Fdsdh1 (talk) 21:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC))

a quick search of JSTOR has not yielded any articles on research into Killer Whale lifespans, which means we need someone who has access to lots of peer-reviewed academic journals who can sort this out for everyone. (Fdsdh1 (talk) 21:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC))

Request for Assistance in making a change

The last paragraph in the article cites a SeaWorld sponsored study regarding life expectancy of captive orca vs orca in the wild. A counterpoint study not sponsored by any such organization (but published in the journal Marine Mammal Science) indicates that orca in captivity live shorter lives than those in the wild. Can we get this other study included in the article? 2602:302:D13C:58E0:1564:1316:E94E:422D (talk) 14:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2016

202.161.66.18 (talk) 22:20, 21 February 2016 (UTC)orcas can live up to 115 years in the wild and 14 years in captivity

No reliable source provided.--JOJ Hutton 22:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 March 2016

They can Harm people in captivity as a orca named Tilikum killed 3 people including Dawn Brancheau

Reyaan1234 (talk) 22:12, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Prey depletion - a source

The article could do with something about competition with fisheries, or maybe that needs its own article. Here's one source:

Fisheries also have a major, albeit difficult to quantify, indirect impact on cetaceans. Most whales and dolphins feed opportunistically on a variety of fish and cephalopod species. However, schooling fish, such as herring, mackerel and sand eel, are often preferred prey. Over-exploitation of fish stocks and their subsequent dramatic declines impose major threats to marine predators dependent upon them for food. Such a reduction in prey availability may be seen as a form of habitat degradation.
In fact, most of the cetacean species commonly occurring in the Agreement Area (short-beaked common dolphin, bottlenose dolphin, harbour porpoise, killer whale, Atlantic white-sided dolphin and white-beaked dolphin) are vulnerable to prey depletion. This is especially true for populations with restricted or localized coastal distributions (see e.g. Perrin, Würsig & Thewissen (Eds.) 2009. Encyclopaedia of Marine Mammals. Second Edition). Shifts in diet corresponding to a decline in abundance of preferred fish species have e.g. been observed in harbour porpoises in Scottish waters and the southern North Sea and in other parts of the world outside of the ASCOBANS Area.

from ASCOBANS:Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans in the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas [1] Carbon Caryatid (talk) 13:32, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Capture for marine mammal theme parks being a cause for altering status to endangered or threatened

The third article says "Some local populations are considered threatened or endangered due to prey depletion, habitat loss, pollution (by PCBs), capture for marine mammal parks, and conflicts with human fisheries. "

NOAA estimates whale populations to be at 50,000 [1]and only about 150 whales have been captured since 1961[2]. To say that capture for marine mammal parks contributes to endangering killer whales seems out of touch with actual numbers.

Additionally, the author does not provide a source for such a statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadeofmyheart (talk • contribs) 03:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/whales/killer-whale.html
  2. ^ http://us.whales.org/wdc-in-action/fate-of-captive-orcas

There are some hyperlinks within the article that lead to empty or nonexistent pages that should either be removed from the article or altered. However, the bias in this article is nonexistent, mainly informational, so good work.AshleyCal (talk) 03:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Ashleycal, 22:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2016

there is a small typo: "Aisan" -> "Asian" Sovetkin (talk) 21:30, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

 Already done —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2017

Life cycle age needs to be adjusted to removed maximum age limit. An age limit does not exist for any biological species and implies no individuals can live past that. While the sentence past this shows that one individual did, it is structured to imply that this one individual is an outlier when we have no supporting evidence of this. The reflected change is supported by the sentence that follows it. No new references need to be added.

The change should be made as follows, under Life Cycle subsection:

"with a maximum of 90 years" should be changed to "but have been found to live up to over 100 years" Akidari (talk) 20:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Partly done: @Akidari: I have removed the unsourced, inconsistent phrase "with a maximum of 90 years." However, the wording of "have been found to live up to over 100 years" seems to imply that there may be multiple killer whales that have been found to live beyond 100 years. Essentially, please provide a reliable source to qualify that there are other examples beyond the outlier given in the following sentence. Otherwise, adding the phrase seems unnecessary. JustBerry (talk) 13:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2017

Please remove the following ear-rending garbage: 188.24.217.199 (talk) 09:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 10:54, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Killer 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) 20:08, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Killer 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) 10:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2017

When hunting sharks, killer whales always end up flipping the shark upside down, regardless of how the attack starts. When flipped upside down, the shark goes into a paralyzed state known as ‘tonic immobility’ and can’t fight back, which suggests that the orcas understand a little something about shark biology. It doesn’t necessarily mean they understand the process, just that they know if the shark is upside down, they won’t get hurt.

Read more: http://marinesciencetoday.com/2013/11/22/oceans-toughest-predators-great-white-shark-vs-killer-whale/#ixzz4pecr42hV SvetiXo (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. In other words, which section should this go? jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Dear all, thx for the amazing insight in a wonderful creature. Hereby I wanted to report you all that link '32' is dead-ending > Killer Whale (Orcinus orca) NOAA Fisheries, Office of Protected Resources. Retrieved March 14, 2010, Jasperwillem (talk) 07:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I have corrected that citation. larryv (talk) 05:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killer 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) 16:59, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Killer 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) 00:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Killer 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) 14:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killer 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) 01:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Killer 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) 16:34, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killer 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) 17:05, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Uppercase

I think in the first sentence the word "Orca" should be written with uppercase letter because its a name just like ours T.Artist (talk) 22:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

No, because it's not talking about an individual named "Orca." Common names are not capitalized. Unless we also assume you want to capitalize "Dog" and "Cat" and "Dolphin," too.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough. T.Artist (talk) 21:48, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Killer 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) 17:53, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

"Indigenous cultures"

Indigenous cultures of where? The word is also misused in the last paragraph of the lead. The whale has a worldwide distribution. Srnec (talk) 15:32, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2018

In the lifecycles section...

Change this:

Captive killer whale lifespans are typically significantly shorter, usually less than 25 years; however, numerous individuals are alive in their 30s, and a few have reached their 40s.[1][2]

To this:

Evidence suggests similar reproductive and survivorship potential between captive and free-ranging killer whales. Captive killer whales data show a medium and average life expectancy of 28.8 and 41.6 years, respectively. Free-ranging killer whales data show a medium and average life expectancy of 29.3 and 42.3 years, respectively.[3]

Reason:

The citations in the original text appear to be from organizations that do not publish peer-reviewed research. The Journnal of Mammalogy is a well respected peer reviewed journal with research that contradicts what's currently published. I should note that in the acknowledgements of the cited journal article, the authors state, "This is a SeaWorld technical contribution number 2014-05-C." However, I could find not fault in the methodology of the study, and therefore, feel like the data and results are valid. In the case of the wdcs citation, their mission is animal protection, which indicates a strong motivation to publish information that supports their cause. Similarly, ocra network does not appear to have produced scientific research on this topic. Jonkatora (talk) 14:41, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Hoyt, Erich; Howard E. Garrett; Naomi A. Rose (1995). "Observations of disparity between educational material related to killer whales (Orcinus orca) disseminated by public display institutions and the scientific literature" (PDF). Retrieved February 16, 2010.
  2. ^ Williams, Vanessa (2001). Captive Orcas 'Dying to Entertain You'. Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society. Retrieved February 16, 2010
  3. ^ Robeck, Todd; Willis, Kevin; Scarpuzzi, Michael; O'Brien, Justine (September 2015). "Comparisons of life-history parameters between free-ranging and captive killer whale (Orcinus orca) populations for application toward species management". Oxford Academic, Journal of Mammalogy. Journal of Mammalogy. pp. 1055–1070. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyv113. Retrieved 1 February 2018.


 Not done: While the references do contain page ranges, none of them contain the actual page numbers where the information may be found. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 18:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I've removed the sentence in question from #Life cycle because I don't believe it's relevant in that section, discussed in greater detail later. This paper you're suggesting is already discussed in #Captivity, but now that I'm looking at it more closely, I find the criticism of it pretty extreme based on the one Huffington Post reference. The lead author's status as an executive employee of SeaWorld is very interesting, but if this is the only article criticizing this paper, then it's overplayed: this researcher is not an expert in marine mammalogy, the Huffington Post article's credibility is lost when it tries to include PETA, and the Wikipedia article's use of an anti-captivity "report" from the Human Society itself cites specific life expectancies in the wild, which the Huffington Post article claims should be much higher… Rhinopias (talk) 18:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 February 2018

Change the text where it says Richard LeDuc. There is a link on his name that should be removed to a Wikipedia page, as the page for the scientist does not exist. 2601:603:1B80:7345:19AB:330B:BE9B:4C4D (talk) 04:24, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: It's not too bad to have WP:Redlinks in an article. If it is already a potentially notable subject / issue, it prompts edditors to consider creating the page. — IVORK Discuss 04:56, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

"Killer whale" v. "orca"

The name "killer whale" was deprecated in favour of "orca" in the mid-twentieth century, after it was discovered that orcas do not prey on humans. "Orca" is used by science, government, the media, and in general conversation. I live in a part of the world where many orcas reside on a permanent basis and where orcas are frequently referred to in the media, yet it has been many years since I have heard or read the phrase "killer whale", with the exception of this article.Geordie (talk) 22:39, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I see this has been previously discussed.Geordie (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Among other things, it has been repeatedly pointed out in aforementioned previous discussions that a) "killer whale" is still the more commonly used common name, that b) the "killer" in "killer whale" refers to their preying on other whales, and that c) the implication that the "killer" in "killer whale" refers to them eating humans is a fallacy of etymology. That, and to imply that "orca" is less offensive than "killer whale" conveniently wholly ignores the fact that "orca" derives from the ancient name of a sea monster legendary for its inherent horribleness.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
I must agree in that I have not heard 'killer whale' commonly at all; it actually threw me off when I had first read it, for I am much more familiar with hearing 'orca' both online and in person. Where is the term 'killer whale' still more common if I may ask? Torisien (talk) 02:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Orcinus orca pacifica?

Does the Killer Whale or ORCA have a subspecies? [1] This came when i was just browsing the Database for fun and some new info for future wikipedia projects. I heard somewere the Morden Killer whale does not have any subspecies but this seems to contradict that. I could not find much else about it. Is this a case of mistaken identity? Can someone please answer?--Bubblesorg (talk) 04:38, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

See Killer_whale#Types. It's being discussed; currently no extant subspecies are recognized AFAIK. As for fossil subspecies, don't know. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:01, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Paleontological database".

Half of killer whales doomed to die from pollution

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/sep/27/orca-apocalypse-half-of-killer-whales-doomed-to-die-from-pollution

John Cummings (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2018

killer whales can weigh up to 8 tons and the heaviset killer whale ever found was 10 tons. 204.102.4.65 (talk) 16:42, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

 Not done. No sample content or source. --Zefr (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Disputed content

Hi all, I made some changes but they were reverted with a note to discuss and I am happy to do so. Here are my concerns:

  • The "cooperation with humans" section is not supported by the citations. In the main article used to support the citation I was unable to find any content about cooperative hunting nor did it mention old Tom. Please correct me if I am wrong.
  • From Taxonomy and evolution: "Although the term "orca" is increasingly used, English-speaking scientists most often use the traditional name "killer whale". "
needs a citation. If this is based on personal observation and not citation, it is WP:SYNTH.
  • From Taxonomy and evolution: "Indeed, the genus name Orcinus means "of the kingdom of the dead", or "belonging to Orcus".Ancient Romans originally used orca (pl. orcae) for these animals, possibly borrowing Greek ὄρυξ (óryx), which referred (among other things) to a whale species."
This is a very common misconception. The etymology is not related to the god Orcus, but instead the latin word orca. See citations at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/orca and also https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Orcinus. I can dig up more sources later if there is still dispute about this, but I'm too busy currently.
  • From Taxonomy and evolution: "The term "orca" is euphemistically preferred by some to avoid the negative connotations of "killer", and because, being part of the family Delphinidae, the species is more closely related to other dolphins than to whales."
All dolphins are whales, my suggested edit for this issue was to delete everything after the word "killer".

Lets discuss. †Basilosauridae❯❯❯Talk 17:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for raising the concerns, refining the content in closely reviewed articles is a good thing, even when many have already done so.
On the first point, human and orca cooperation is reported in references elsewhere. The phenomena associated with Australian whaling generated a lot of conjecture, I will try to find a scholarly review of the literature that I read years ago. The facts currently needs qualification and closer citations (not removal, yet)
I agree, without a citation that might be SYN, perhaps the product of the perennial dispute over the common name.
The etymology of orca is said to from French orque or Latin orca (probably French to English) and those terms are, as you say, a 'kind of whale'.
The last point is similar to the second, it looks like some blather to give the impression that vernacular terms are deliberately contrived and systematic. I now regret sticking my nose in, what you did was probably an improvement. — cygnis insignis 03:54, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
They are called "ORCA" not Killer Whale. They are the largest "DOLPHIN". The name Killer Whale was a reversal of the ancient mariner term Whale Killer after they were observed attacking other whales.
The title of this page is wrong as is much of the text as observed by the original poster on this talk section.
This page should be renamed "ORCA" and search results "Killer Whale" should redirect to that title, not the other way around as it is now. 2605:A000:1407:8269:D4D9:68A5:DFBD:4EBA (talk) 12:28, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
As cygnis insignis noted, the title has been debated several times before and it turns out that even in scientific literature "killer whale" is a more common common name than "orca," regardless of the etymology of the name (of course, scientific literature also uses the scientific name). And since dolphins are toothed whales anyway, the name is not inaccurate. Rlendog (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
they are merely common names, the most common name is the one the both refer to: the sentence case beginning of the accepted description, Orcinus orca … [large monochrome predatory aquatic mammal species …] cygnis insignis 15:16, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Any interest in moving this page to "Orca"?

There's currently a discussion underway at [2] about whether the page "List of captive orcas" should be renamed "List of captive killer whales"? The motivation for this is consistency with this page's name. But perhaps it's this page that should be renamed - to "Orca"? The name "orca" is no longer obscure; in fact, it now seems to dominate "killer whale" online. Would anyone like to propose that this page be moved to "Orca" (with a redirect from "Killer whale", of course)? Ross Finlayson (talk) 19:30, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Consensus is to use the common names given in Mammal Species of the World for titles of mammal articles (although that isn't followed 100% of the time). MSW uses Killer Whale, as does Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Commission (see here). Plantdrew (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
  • The current title is pretty clearly the common name for this topic. I would also note that Encyclopedia Britannica uses the same title for their article.[3] Rreagan007 (talk) 07:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • If we are following Mammal species of the world, the title of that entry is Orcinus orca, written large and bold This is what the common names refer to, a species, more or less imperfectly, and the site makes it clear the vernacular is incidental. The assumption is that another so-called common name must be selected as a substitute, which is not what MSW or any other authority intend when they provide vernacular in one language. The article is then used to elevate one common name to replace any other for consistency, that is not what this site should be doing and is against policy. The article is about a species, with an explanation that killer whales are—and are not—dolphins according to some muddy articles that attempt to elevate the name "dolphin". This a perennial discussion that is immediately resolved by doing what reliable sources do, use the name that has been most common for more than two hundred and fifty years for very good reasons. cygnis insignis 09:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • WP:FAUNA states to use the common name, so killer whale. †Basilosauridae❯❯❯Talk 17:08, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
It says to use the most common name, which is Orcinus orca. cygnis insignis 17:16, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
”When what is the most common name in English, or the veracity of that most common name, is so disputed in reliable sources that it cannot be neutrally ascertained, prefer the common name most used (orthography aside) by international zoological nomenclature authorities over regional ones. When there is no common name or no consensus can be reached on the most common name, or if it isn't clear what taxon the common name refers to (as in the sardine example above), use the scientific name.”
A scientific name isn’t a common name. The most common name is killer whale, which isn’t “regionally disputed”. We all agree that the common name is killer whale and the scientific name is Orcinus orca. Since it is not a disputed common name, it should be used over the scientific name or over a zoological authority. If there is verifiable proof that “Orca” is more common than “killer whale” I would support the change. This is my interpretation of the guideline. †Basilosauridae❯❯❯Talk 17:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

orcas have infanticide?

orcas have infanticide? i always though that orcas don't have infanticide and i always though that orcas adopt orca calves from other orcas from other families and in 2002 i watched national geographic about orcas and the marine biologist said that orcas choosing mates by making friendships with other orcas from other families so if orcas became friends with other orcas from other families how orcas have infanticide? if orcas have infanticide how orcas became friends with other orcas from other families? maybe the global climate change make orcas became more cruel and commit infanticide instead of being friendly with other orcas from other families? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.137.126.38 (talk) 16:11, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Keep in mind that, just like with humans, orcas have varying personalities and no two behave in exactly the same way. Some humans adopt children from other families; some humans commit infanticide. Just because some orcas kill calves does not necessarily mean that all of them do. Intelligent animals (such as humans and orcas) are often unpredictable in their behavior, and it is difficult to make broad generalizations about the behavior of an entire species. In the incident mentioned in the article, the male orca probably killed the calf so that he could mate with its mother. Although it is a terrible thing by our standards (and possibly even by orcas' standards), there was a reason behind the male's behavior, and it was not a random act of violence - it was a purposeful attack that required intelligence to plan and execute. Intelligence can be used for deeds both helpful and harmful to other individuals - we observe this all the time in humans. So, orcas sometimes act "friendly" and sometimes act "cruel"; this varied behavior is common in intelligent animals. Zach Varmitech (talk) 19:26, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2019

it is not a part of ocianic dolphin family 188.39.29.163 (talk) 10:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

It appears they are. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:33, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2020

Vocalizations subsection: "Ffamily" in "[...] Ffamily-specific calls have been observed [...]" should be "Family". Mitlabence (talk) 20:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done --Fama Clamosa (talk) 20:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2020

Orca's are apart of the dolphin family, but the wiki calls it a toothed whale as shown in the quote, "The killer whale or orca is a toothed whale belonging to the oceanic dolphin family, of which it is the largest member." In the same quote the wiki says it's a dolphin, so the two statements are contradictory. knowing the Orca is apart of the dolphin family but then saying its a toothed whale makes absolutely no sense. Valve pls fix KyotoRenu (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Please be aware that the oceanic dolphin family, Delphinidae, is a subgroup within the toothed whale group, Odontoceti, and saying that "the orca is a toothed whale belonging to the oceanic dolphin family" makes as much sense as saying "the cat is a feliform carnivoran belonging to the cat family," i.e., perfect sense.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:50, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 Not done: Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2020

Killer whales are dolphins not whales! 150.143.125.194 (talk) 22:48, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

The article says this in the first sentence of the lede. RudolfRed (talk) 23:30, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2020

The title of the article should be orcas as their official name is that and not killer whales Dairej (talk) 19:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done - See this. Zefr (talk) 20:01, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2020

Feeding - Fish. Can a confirmed user amend the section on sharks and mention the exploitation of Tonic immobility by Orca. See https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2017/nov/16/orca-whales-vs-great-white-sharks-in-a-battle-of-the-apex-predators-who-wins 2A00:23C6:3B82:8500:A0B2:C5D4:2B10:D727 (talk) 23:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

A possible source, or can someone please look at this and judge if this can be added to the article as a source?

"I've never seen or heard of attacks': scientists baffled by orcas harassing boats. Reports of orcas striking sailing boats in the Straits of Gibraltar have left sailors and scientists confused. Just what is causing such unusually aggressive behaviour?" Found here at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/13/the-tale-of-the-killer-whales dated 13 September 2020. Thanks. I'd do it, but I'm a bit rusty and I'm suffering from lack of sleep so I may be wrong on everything. I'm watching a Netflix documentary on the orca now, so I was just being curious though not an expert or anything and wanted more information than the documentary I'm in the middle of watching now. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/13/the-tale-of-the-killer-whales IrishLas (talk) 03:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Also in that the Guardian article “These are very strange events,” says Ezequiel Andréu Cazalla, a cetacean researcher who talked to Morris. “But I don’t think they’re attacks.” Orca specialists around the world are equally surprised, agreeing the behaviour is “highly unusual”, but are cautious, given that the accounts are not from trained researchers. Most agree that something is stressing the orcas. And when it comes to sources of stress, there are plenty to choose from." https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/sep/13/the-tale-of-the-killer-whales IrishLas (talk) 03:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Please help evaluate Old Tom (Killer Whale)

Hey guys, I'm an university student working on the article of old tom and would appreciate any feedback and comments! :) Thank you in advance, Soph

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2020

Killer whales are not whales and this should be clear in the first paragraph. Where it says "The killer whale or orca (Orcinus orca) is a toothed whale belonging to the oceanic dolphin family, of which it is the largest member," it should say "The Orca (Orcinus orca), commonly known as killer whale is the largest member of the oceanic dolphin family," removing "toothed whales" since they are not actually whales.

I suggest calling them Orcas throughout the article to avoid the misnomer.

Source: https://us.whales.org/whales-dolphins/facts-about-orcas/ Giorov (talk) 07:44, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: when you click on toothed whale, it becomes clear that this group doesn't just include whales, that page says it is "a parvorder of cetaceans that includes dolphins, porpoises, and all other whales possessing teeth, such as the beaked whales and sperm whales". Seagull123 Φ 18:08, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Not only are most readers not going to click every link, but that part also doesn't exactly inform readers that they are not whales. I also am still highly in favor of calling them "orcas". Prinsgezinde (talk) 20:53, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Please see the discussion above where Finnigami has made a good argument for why this needs changing. User:Prinsgezinde & User:Seagull123 Jclaxp talk 16:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Naming

Calling it a Killer Whale is outdated and offensive to the species. I suggest changing the article name to Orca, and have every "Killer Whale" changed to Orca. This will create for a more accurate article. When describing other names for it, make sure Orca comes first and have Killer Whale as just one of it's other names. Thank you. Skipperdogman (talk) 00:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

What is the WP:RS evidence (several science-based refs needed) that "killer whale" is an outdated and offensive term? --Zefr (talk) 01:09, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Because certain peoples can not be bothered to understand that "killer whale" is a transliteration of "asesina ballena," referring to thousands of years of humans observing killer whales killing and eating other whales, or that, by the same logic, "orca" is just as outdated and offensive considering it roughly translates as "hell beast" or "sea monster," in addition to assuming that killer whales understand English and take offense to what's said about them.--Mr Fink (talk) 02:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
@Apokryltaros: did not know that, you should add it the article. ~ cygnis insignis 05:18, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
I will as soon as I can find a reliable source to support reinserting it back into the article.Mr Fink (talk) 05:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
While I'm sure Whales can perhaps understand language to a point, I agree with Apokryltaros, no need to change "killer whale" to orca , if you read the article, there is a great section about the origin of the name and why orca became popularized. PrecociousPeach (talk) 09:51, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
I would like to add that in Europe they'd generally be referred to as Orcas and not Killer whales in my experience. Also the user above is incorrect about the translation of Orca which comes from the Roman god Orcus of the underworld [4]. I'd suggest changing the name. Killer whale isn't necessarily offensive, but Orca is certainly a more neutral name and would be harder for anybody to take issue with, and generally I would say is more widely used now. See "Orcas (formerly known as killer whales..)" [5] Jclaxp talk 23:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Please just keep killer whale. This PC world is going too far. Offensive??? What??? I mean no offense. 2601:18E:101:5FC0:ED30:DCA2:FCFE:A872 (talk) 04:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
You are replying to a comment a year old. The discussion since has not mentioned the name 'killer whale' being offensive. As you can see in the well written comment from User:Finnigami the term Killer Whale is in decline and Orca is a more commonly searched for term. I understand your concern about PC culture, but that is not a good argument for why an older and confusing name should remain in place. Jclaxp talk 16:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to reopen this debate. I strongly believe that Orca is the proper name that we should use. I don't care what's "offensive to the species", but I do think there are many points in favor of "Orca". First of all, "Killer Whale" is of course a misnomer, as they are Orcas and not whales. For some animals this is less important, but for Orcas a reasonable person could easily assume that they are whales. As mentioned before, "Killer Whale" came from "Whale Killer" anyway. The name "Orca" has also seen increasing use over time compared to "Killer Whale": Google Ngram Orca vs Killer Whale. The name Orca also has the small benefit of matching the scientific name. Finnigami (talk) 23:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Finnigami I would agree with this. I wonder if a change should be made and a section about the naming added? Your argument makes a very clear case for the usage of "Orca" over "killer whale". Worth adding that the term Orca took over Killer Whale in that link between 2007-2008, this change may be overdue. Jclaxp talk 16:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Orcas are whales. Vide the article's very first sentence. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Elmidae Yes but it is clear the term killer whale isn't as commonly used anymore for whatever reason, whether its due to confusion or not. Jclaxp talk 16:29, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
I personally don't care at all what title the article is under - both alternatives seem fine by me - but the argument "we can't name it 'Killer whale' because it's not a whale" is so far off base that it shouldn't even turn up in the debate. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Elmidae I can respect that. I do believe the name can be slightly confusing for people, however that's not a good reason to rename the article alone. I more just believe the clarity is a side effect. Jclaxp talk 16:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
User:Elmidae Interesting. There seems to be some contradictions among the related wikipedia articles. The article for Dolphin states that Orcas are dolphins, and the article for Whale states that dolphins are not considered whales. Yet, the article for Toothed Whale seems to claim that dolphins are "toothed whales", and that "toothed whales" are simply a subsection of whales. So, are dolphins whales or not? Perhaps we ought to sort this out first. Finnigami (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 May 2021

To fix the spelling mistakes. MossyLion (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, this template is used to suggest specific changes. To request a more general decrease in protection, please post at WP:RFPP. Best, CMD (talk) 10:26, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2021

I want to make the information more specific! I wanna write about which pod type eats what and where each one lives! 71.62.144.231 (talk) 14:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. CMD (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2021

It is misleading to define killer whales as toothed whales, whereby they are not even whales, it's more appropriate and accurate to define them as toothed dolphins. 197.185.111.236 (talk) 14:44, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:48, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
To clarify, all dolphins are toothed whales, not all toothed whales are dolphins. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:50, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
comment: "Whales" are any member of Cetacea, of which dolphins are undisputed members. Claiming that killer whales are dolphins, not whales is as ridiculously false a claim as stating that "cats are felids, not feliaforms."--Mr Fink (talk) 14:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to merge dwarf killer whale entry with killer whale

I recently came across the entry Dwarf killer whale. Most of the scientific information on that page is readily available on this page already. The article's name itself doesn't seem particularly accurate, as the "dwarf" ecotypes are typically referred to as Type B/Type C. Most concerning is the "Defining dwarfism" section, which seems to be totally comprised of fake information from a less-than-reputable website. At best, the article could be altered to represent the Antarctic ecotypes, but I think it would be better suited as a redirect. YellowstoneLimestone (talk) 03:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

  • Support Ordinarily I'd say that this could work as a separate article, but the current state is that practically all the material is already presented at Killer_whale#Types, and works better in context than as a standalone. This could be redirected with no loss. Maybe split the "types" section into two further sub-sections though, one for the behavioural types and one for the (putative) dwarf types. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 13:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Redirect but not merge. This article is large enough at over 9300 words. LittleJerry (talk) 20:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Support, the only information that I think should be merged is slightly more expansive descriptions, and potentially some detail on the Soviet research cited to doi:10.1644/06-mamm-a-118r1.1. This seems a minor addition length-wise. The rest is either already covered, or very dubious as per above. CMD (talk) 08:32, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021

Please remove 

They are sometimes called the wolves of the sea

and add 

They are sometimes called "wolves of the sea"

When a term is being discussed, it ought to be placed in quotes; see [6]. Elsewhere the article uses double quotes (see the "Naming" section) so double quotes ought to be used here as well. 64.203.186.93 (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done, and thank you for your input! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 15:57, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2021 (2)

In the introduction, please remove 

Wild killer whales are not considered a threat to humans and no fatal attack on humans has ever been documented

and add 

Wild killer whales are not considered a threat to humans, and no fatal attack on humans has ever been documented,

This is a long phrase that's better broken up, and it can be a Garden-path sentence: "Wild killer whales are not considered a threat to humans and to no fatal...?" 64.203.186.93 (talk) 15:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done, and thank you very much! P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 15:57, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Remove “up to scientific debate” from comparison between wild v captive lifespan.

It is widely accepted as scientific fact that Orcas live significantly shorter lives in captivity, and suffer from a deteriorating mental status as opposed to those found in the wild. 2600:1700:1990:6240:496:738A:6B2:F55E (talk) 22:31, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Whaling

From the section about relationships with humans whaling on killer whales is completely missing. At least in Japan killer whales were (and perhaps are) hunted for meat and oil. I just read a paper written by a linguist on the matter of killer whale names. He apparently believes that whaling on killer whale was economicaly important in the Middle ages, at least in the region of Northern sea and Northern atlantic. I'm very far from being convinced in reliability of this work, but I belive that the matter should be elucidated. Эйхер (talk) 21:25, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

The article in the Danish Wikipedia appears to contain relevant information. Эйхер (talk) 07:15, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Captivity

In this section we're missing some info. Sea world did say in '16 to stop breading. But in '17 orca Morgan, owned by seaworld, got pregnant despite agreements not to use her for breeding and seaworlds own promise 46.244.6.119 (talk) 14:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Idea: change the page title to "orca"

"Killer whale" is a misleading name, as it provides a negative connotation, making people believe that orcas can kill people, but the fact is that wild orcas have never fatally harmed humans. Instead, the entire page should be renamed to "Orca", a more neutral name that doesn't carry any negative meanings. This has another layer of benefit that "orca" is the scientific name of this animal, while "killer whale" is just a colloquial name. There are already precedents for this, for instance, the page for the plant commonly called "corn" is instead named maize. Windywendi (talk) 17:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Please note this has been discussed many times in the past, with previous discussion finding that Killer whale remains the more wp:commonname. CMD (talk) 01:05, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
@Chipmunkdavis The last time it was discussed was 7 years ago. Common usage can change. Looking at the Google Ngrams for "Orcas" and "Killer Whales", Orcas have continued to overtake Killer Whales in the past few years (the Ngrams for the singular "Orca" vs "Killer Whale" has always been a blowout, but that is skewed by use of the scientific name Orcinus orca). Similarly, a google news search for orca -"killer whale" returns 2.9 million results, while "killer whale" -orca only returns 58,800. Google Trends shows that orca has dominated killer whale over the last 10 years, and does so in all english-speaking parts of the world.
Putting aside the numerous WP:IDONTLIKEIT arguments in the 2015 discussion, one of the points made was that when you used "orcas are" vs "killer whales are" that killer whales won, but the mgrams has gotten drastically closer since then, especially if you include "orca are". Similarly, the Google Trends for "orcas are" vs "killer whales are" shows that orcas have overtaken killer whales over the past year. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Agreed. The title "Killer whale" is very misleading. Honestly, I wasn't familiar with the term "killer whale" until I came across this article, so I have a hard time believing this is the "common name" of the animal. I doubt "killer whale" is anymore common than "orca". The article should be titled either "orca" or "orca whale" which are the more accurate names. Maestro2016 (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Who uses "orca whale"?--Mr Fink (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Agree that the article's title should be changed to Orca, Killer Whale is misleading. A discussion seven years ago is ancient history / no longer relevant. Ilenart626 (talk) 20:55, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Except that this same discussion is brought up constantly over and over and over again and again and again because WP:ICANTHEARTHAT. Furthermore, it's hilarious watching well-meaning editors constantly petition, beg and angrily demanded that the article be renamed over the mistaken assumption that the animal either was named for an alleged habit of killing and eating humans, or that the name is malicious blood libel that will make people falsely assume the animals kill and eat humans, even though the name these petitioners want the article renamed as either refers to the Roman Hell God, Orcus, or the Ancient Greek progenitor of all sea monsters, Phorcys, or a Welsh word meaning "monster." So much less offensive than "man-eating whale/dolphin."--Mr Fink (talk) 00:48, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

The misleading part is whale, the killer appellation is just a weird legacy from some piratey vernacular. ~ cygnis insignis 06:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

size/appearance

Under the Appearance and morphology section, ton or tonne should be hyperlinked to give the reader a better understanding of the metric weights of these swimmers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.131.123 (talk) 08:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 25 January 2022

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 as proposed. Consensus is clear that "orca" is not just a better name, but the more common one. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 19:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Killer whale → Orca – Orca is now the common name for this animal. This is shown by Google's ngram viewer and by Google's search patterns. Moving this page will align with what the WP:COMMONNAME of this animal now is. Spekkios (talk) 22:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Putting aside the numerous WP:IDONTLIKEIT arguments in the 2015 discussion, one of the points made was that when you used "orcas are" vs "killer whales are" that killer whales won, but the ngrams has gotten drastically closer since then, especially if you include "orca are". Similarly, the Google Trends for "orcas are" vs "killer whales are" shows that orcas have overtaken killer whales over the past year. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Interesting! The most compelling arguments in previous discussions were that Killer whale remains the common name. The evidence from Ahecht demonstrates that with recent trends in usage the proposed title is the common one.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support (strongly) per nom, and per points and data listed by User:Ahecht above. It genuinely does seem like the common name has, in fact, swapped from "Killer whale" to "Orca"! Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support - As an additional point, I made a few Google queries and found that orca is outpacing killer whale in use by major U.S. newspapers by significant margins. The New York Times has a narrow 1,890–1,410 split in favor of orca, but The Seattle Times favors orca by a 3,670–530 margin. Other papers from regions with significant regular populations are more like the latter. SounderBruce 02:41, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 04:54, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support - Language changes over time. The WP:COMMONNAME has pretty clearly changed, and rather rapidly too-- within just a few years! When I was a kid, killer whale was definitely the term. Now, not so much. We need to follow the change. Fieari (talk) 07:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom --awkwafaba (📥) 12:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Neutral here is the abhorent suggestion, it negates resorting to uncitable ngrams, individual opinions, style guides, and clickbait titles on what "is the common name"?: Orcinus orca, known as orca or killer whale, is a carnivorous marine mammal. Distinguished by its large size from other delphinids (dolphins), the species … ~ cygnis insignis 14:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Cygnis insignis: My understanding was that the common name was not something that needs an explicit secondary source claiming that it's the common name, but editor research into what is actually used most commonly. Quoting WP:COMMONNAME, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in a significant majority of independent, reliable English-language sources)" My reading of this policy is that it means we have to do the research (yes, original research), which can include the uncitable google ngram search. Fieari (talk) 04:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
      • That identifies a common practice, not an application of policy. The binomial is not an *official* name, Orcinus orca is a reference to an accepted descripton and undeniably the most common name. Naming conventions for flora, linked below, provides better guidance to npov. ~ cygnis insignis 03:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. -- Maykii (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Encyclopedia Britannica uses "killer whale" for the title of their article on this subject.[7] I understand that more academic sources tend to prefer the more scientific name rather than the more common name, but to the average English speaker and reader, the more commonly used term "killer whale" will be more recognizable to them. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Rreagan007: What do you say to the claim that this used to be the commonly recognized name, but that even in the general public, this has changed over time? The google ngram is pretty good support for the claim, as is my own personal experience. (not to rely on personal accounts, but that's why the ngram is there) Fieari (talk) 04:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
    • I think the distinction between academic/scientific sources vs. usage by the general public is a fair concern and something that often goes unaddressed in move discussions. However, given that news stories, which provide a general sense of usage among the "regular" public, also seem to prefer the proposed title, we'd need some sort of strong counter evidence to demonstrate your claim.--Yaksar (let's chat) 15:52, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Showiecz (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I personally would have supported this is it wasn't for Britannica. WP:FLORACOMMONNAME suggests along with the fact both names are common and "orca" has probably become more common recently. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:23, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support Orca seems to be the most common name these days, so changing it from Killer Whale to Orca is more justified now than it was 7 years ago. --TimTheDragonRider (talk) 16:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support, killer whale is now almost unheard of in the Pacific Northwest, home to many orcas. Facts707 (talk) 08:03, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per all of the above. Larrayal (talk) 20:12, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that the discussion can be closed with overwhelming support for the change? --TimTheDragonRider (talk) 19:03, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

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.

Requested move 2 February 2022

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: Procedural close, this requires an admin/page mover, not a new RM. (non-admin closure) CMD (talk) 06:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Killer whale → Orca – There was consensus to move but apparently the page was not moved so this is just a renomination. Showiecz (talk) 04:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

  • I put in a technical request - for some reason the page was actually move-protected. As soon as an admin bothers to notice, the move will be carried out. Red Slash 06:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
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.

redlist 2017 assessment

The 2017 redlist assessment says, "Experts agree that the present taxon likely includes more than one subspecies, and possibly multiple species", so still 'data-deficient' because the diversity of the genus is [still] unrecognised (citing Society for Marine Mammalogy 2017). ~ cygnis insignis 19:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Confirmation that Orca kill adult blue whales published

Currently, the article says, "fully grown adult blue whales, which are possibly too large to overwhelm, are not believed to be prey for orcas".

However, there have now been multiple confirmed kills of adult blue whales by orcas, from 2019-2021, as published in Marine Mammel Science on January 21, 2022. Link: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mms.12906 Also reported on CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/06/australia/orcas-hunt-kill-adult-blue-whale-intl-scli/index.html

I would have updated the article myself, but it's protected. Can someone with permissions to do so please update the article to reflect this new information? Thanks. 2001:4898:A800:1012:A502:24E3:C937:40F2 (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this, I read the reports at the time. I modified the bit quoted above using this blog, which reports the source mentioned. I changed to intro to reflect that, seems very notable. ~ cygnis insignis 21:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Etymology: Killer Whales were once "Whale Killers"?

The etymology section of this article was a little confusing to me, so I went searching elsewhere for information, and found this page: [8]. It claims that the term was originally "Whale Killer", and also that even Orca, from Orcus, is a reference to them killing whales. This makes a lot of sense and would be an excellent thing to put in our etymology section! Except... while this charity (Whale and Dolphin Conservation) does have some claim to knowledge about Orcas, it's probably not the BEST source to go to. I'd prefer an academic article, but my google-fu on google scholar seems to be weak, as finding a source that talks about the etymology at all is proving difficult. Can anyone help out? Is there a better source? Or is this WDC article bs? It certainly sounds and feels like it makes sense, especially in light of the recent confirmation (above) that Orcas do kill whales sometimes. Fieari (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

That source refers to asesina ballenas, the second term is mentioned in the Glossary of Cetacean Vernacular Names (Hershkovitz, 1966). Another source I used recently at Orcinus discusses some of the names, Iredale, Tom; Troughton, Ellis Le G. (1933). "The correct generic names for the Grampus or Killer Whale, and the so called Grampus or Risso's Dolphin". Records of the Australian Museum. 19 (1): 28–36.. ~ cygnis insignis 04:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
@Fieari: Found a ref that directly states that whale killer was widely used then transposed as killer whale Handbook of Marine Mammals: The Second Book of Dolphins and the Porpoises edited by Sam H. Ridgway, et al. ~ cygnis insignis 02:23, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2022

Three types have been documented in the Antarctic. Two dwarf species, named Orcinus nanus and Orcinus glacialis, were described during the 1980s by Soviet researchers, but most cetacean researchers are sceptical about their status, and linking these directly to the types described below is difficult.[19]


"Please change sceptical to skeptical". Line 2 Kdog2022 (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done article apparently uses Canadian English and I think skeptical is more common there Cannolis (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Correcting a typo

Since I can't edit the article, can somebody change the word user with the word use in the below quote from the first paragraph under § Naming:

...the user of "orca" instead of "killer whale"...

imctd (talk) 18:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

@Imctd  Done --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

This article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Like humans, Orca whales are social creatures and studies have shown the extent of resident orca whale lineage follows a cultural model supported by the acoustic studies of their calls. These subgroups are known as clans within resident whale communities, where the distinction of different acoustic calls support the hypothesis for the clan associative label of resident whales. Studies show that the calls within particular clans are similar within some groups and not others, suggesting that the designation of a whale's clan reflects a common ancestry as supported by the acoustics of the whale's calls. [1]

References

  1. ^ Yurk, Barrett-Lennard, L., Ford, J., & Matkin, C. (2002). Cultural transmission within maternal lineages: vocal clans in resident killer whales in southern Alaska. Animal Behaviour., 63(6), 1103–1119. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbe.2002.3012

Possible change of the section about orca's attacking boats in the western coast of Portugal and Spain

This is just a suggestion - The article current states: "From July to October 2020, there were at least forty reliable reports of orcas attacking boats off the Atlantic coast of Portugal and Spain, unusual and unprecedented behaviour.". But these reports seem to be consistent since 2020 (several articles and reports from 2021, 2022, some even post movies of this on youtube). Example: [1] - and the subject is mentioned on the local news once every couple of months. So maybe this section of the article should be updated / changed to reflect that this does not seem like a "one-off" events, but something more consistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.61.224.253 (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Here's another one, says "Since 2020 however, instances of orcas targeting boats has become more common."[2] Also the orcas have now sunk a boat. GA-RT-22 (talk) 15:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://inspain.news/sailboats-again-aggressively-treated-by-orcas-in-southern-spain/
  2. ^ "Orca That Sunk Boat With Family on Board Rammed Another Vessel Within Hours".

References in error

Reference #27 and #28 are in error, as there are no source to either. tB (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

There is no way for us to know which refs you are talking about, because the numbers can and do change. GA-RT-22 (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
It's the two National Wildlife references in the Appearance section. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Naming section unscientific claims and Spanish naming questions

The naming section of this article specifically says "Orcas are commonly referred to as "killer whales", despite being a type of dolphin". This claim really has no basis because "whale" and "dolphin" are popular names, not taxonomical terms, and they do not have any scientific definition. Any small cetacean with a long snout is called a dolphin, any large cetacean with a big head is called a whale. Therefore orcas may belong to the family Delphinidae, but they can still be called whatever in popular terms.

Also, the Spanish term "asesina ballenas", described as the origin of the mistranslation "ballenas asesinas", is actually "asesina-ballenas", combined like a single word, which makes more sense cause one is in singular and the other in plural. Also, even though I am not Spanish and do not really know Spanish myself, I kind of question whether this term is really literally translated to "whale killers" and not "killer whales" or "killing whales", because "ballenas" here seems to describe the object. 5.55.112.141 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

"Orcas are commonly referred to as "killer whales", despite being a type of dolphin". also aren't dolphins, whales anyway? Realfakebezalbob (talk) 00:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Orca order

You have its order as artiodactyl , which are even toed hoofed land mammals. Should be Cetacea ( which you have as the Family) 24.186.50.61 (talk) 19:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Please read the 2nd paragraph of Artiodactyl. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

"also called" or "or"

"Orca or killer whale" and "Orca, also called killer whale" are both fine. Readers will understand either way. Still, it would be better to discuss the arguments for/against either construction here than in edit-warring summaries. Schazjmd (talk) 22:50, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rebecca Beecham Gotzl and Str1977:, please discuss the lead sentence here. (You both have 3 reverts today.) Schazjmd (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your ping, which I am not presuming will work in my favor. In any event, I am happy to avoid ongoing edit-warring.
If the two variants are equally good, editing the original was unnecessary. I believe the original is standard and encyclopedic prose for this case. Compare the Tibetan blue bear wording, for example—also the subject of naming controversy. "Also called killer whale," as if it is an alias, deprecates the name still widely used in scientific publications, as is evidenced in the article's references. I maintain that balance and neutrality are best reflected in the original wording.
But I am prepared to yield, though in my opinion the result would be inferior English prose, and Wikipedian style. Rebecca Beecham Gotzl (talk) 01:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
The "or", while commonly used in journalism, is sloppy wording and, as you call it, "inferior English prose". It suggests that there are two subjects of this article (that can be the case with some articles) standing side by side, when in fact it is one animal known by different names.
"also known as" doesn't deprecate the second name at all, even though in this case it is clearly the non-scientific, colloquial name. "also known as" means the very same as what your version intents, just in a clearer way.
Any argument of "editing the original was unnecesssary" equally falls on the revert as well.
Str1977 (talk) 10:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm afraid I might have triggered this dispute. An editor completely removed "killer whale" from the lead, with the edit summary That's not its scientific name. I thought perhaps their objection was "killer whale" being immediately followed by "Orcinus orca", so when I restored "killer whale", I put it after the scientific name with "also called".
The lead was Killer whale or orca from 2009 until January 2022 when the article title was changed from Killer whale to Orca and the lead then swapped to Orca or killer whale. I don't think either variation (or or also called) is worth warring over. Schazjmd (talk) 13:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your historical overview of this matter. I agree, and will not defend against further edits to this article. Many of the world's whale populations, including orca populations, are only sketchily described in Wikipedia, or lack up-to-date contributions. I hope my colleagues there will work to improve this situation. Note that Tibetan blue bear has now been altered. Rebecca Beecham Gotzl (talk) 18:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
@Schazjmd: I completely agree with your take on this. Str1977 (talk) 21:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Reliability of BBC Earth YouTube channel

Hi, I recently added a link to a BBC Earth YouTube channel. My edit was

Orcas will engage in surplus killing, that is, killing that is not designed to be for food. As an example, a BBC film crew witnessed orca in British Columbia playing with a male Steller sea lion to exhaustion, but not eating it.

The reference linked to this video (at 2:06)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3f-FsAUcqMs


This was reverted by @User:Schazjmd with the reason "Not a documentary, dubious that it's a reliable source".

What does the Wiki Community think about the reliability of BBC Earth as a source? I think it's very reliable, and so my text has no problem. BrightOrion (talk) 00:50, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@BrightOrion, please check the article history. After your edit, an editor added an External link to nextstates.com and labelled it a documentary (it wasn't). That is the edit I reverted. Schazjmd (talk) 12:08, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi Schazjmd. Sorry, I didn't realise that. Problem solved. BrightOrion (talk) 12:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Avengers

Does the Avengers episode "Killer Whale" really need to be mentioned in the part before the lead? It doesn't really seem notable enough for a redirect explanation. ("Killer Whale" redirects here. For The Avengers episode, see Killer Whale (The Avengers).)

OmegaMantis (talk) 18:49, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I tend to agree that the TV episode doesn't seem notable enough. However, for comparison, there are Doctor Who episodes (also from the 1960's) called "The Chase" and "The Crusade".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Doctor_Who_episodes_(1963%E2%80%931989)#Season_2_(1964%E2%80%931965)
The Chase is mentioned in the disambiguation page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase
as is "The Crusade"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusade_(disambiguation)
So, based on that, maybe the "Killer Whale" disambiguation link is OK. BrightOrion (talk) 04:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

I noticed that the last sentence of the 4th introduction paragraph has no citation or reference link for the claim made. I decided to make an account and mention this because I've wanted to fix typos and provide citations for things in the past but admittedly been too lazy to contribute, and also because I thought that was an interesting piece of information but I was left thinking "but to who and why?" which made me question the veracity of the claim in general. My account is too young to do edits on protected pages (and I will be a novice contributor for a while, don't want to step on anyone's toes) but I just intended to add a "citation needed" marker to the end of the sentence. I may remember to look around for a citation myself but I make no promises of doing so prior to 6/8/23 since I am a student and need to study for my final exams and write term papers. Any guidance is greatly appreciated and thank you for doing important work, I hope to do some here as well since I love knowledge and free access to it. Felix Orion (talk) 07:46, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Felix Orion and welcome!
It's common for the lead (the text before the first subheading) to be uncited; you can read more about it at WP:LEADCITE. The purpose of the lead is to summarize the body of the article (which is where the citations are generally listed). Now, if you find something in the lead that isn't properly supported in the body, asking for a citation is helpful, but not if it's simply a summary version of more detailed and sourced content below. Hope that helps, and good luck on your exams! Schazjmd (talk) 14:52, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
And specifically, the final sentence of the lead appears to be a summary of Orca#Relationship with humans, which I believe answers the who and why. CMD (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Orca attacks on small boats in Strait of Gibraltar.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/boating-captain-ambushed-orcas-they-knew-exactly-what-they-are-doing/ 2601:243:2680:CD78:5DC5:9A36:1C19:7E10 (talk) 00:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

OK, but what are you trying to say? I suggest you add some text your post as well.BrightOrion (talk) 22:18, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Orca range map should include eastern North Sea and adjacent waters

The current map shows a boundary in the middle of the North Sea, but for several years, Orcas have been regularly seen east of that line, in Skagerrak, Kattegat and along the western shores of Jutland, Denmark. Perhaps an update is in order? 94.254.62.88 (talk) 13:30, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

I just checked the IUCN reference which usually has accurate range information. Indeed, their information matches what you are requesting. As well, the Antarctic range needs expanding as well. I will put in a request with the map makers at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop‎‎. Thanks! - UtherSRG (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 Done - UtherSRG (talk) 12:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Orca "Killer" stereotype Pliny citation

Hello! Local Latin teacher here. Pliny does use the Latin word "orca," but this term does not mean our orca per se, rather it is a word used elsewhere in the Latin language to mean a large-bellied vessel (https://logeion.uchicago.edu/orca), and it is used only three times in Pliny to distinguish this specific creature from the more general balaena (whale). The article should probably say something like (updating the translation included in the article itself to actually reflect the English translation links in the citation note):

The first use of the word "orca" to discuss a whale was by Pliny the Elder, c. 70 CE, to differentiate one creature from the other whales he was discussing. Pliny describes orcas as "...an animal which is peculiarly hostile to the balaena [whale], and the form of which cannot be in any way adequately described, but as an enormous mass of flesh armed with teeth. This animal attacks the balaena its places of retirement, and with its teeth tears its young, or else attacks the females which have just brought forth, and, indeed, while they are still pregnant: and as they rush upon them, it pierces them just as though they had been attacked by the beak of a Liburnian galley."(citation included in the original article should be fine here). Pliny also claims that an "orca" swam into the port at Ostia during the reign of Emperor Claudius, eating fallen imported goods from the ships, before getting stuck in the sandy port and killed by the order of the Emperor.Citation = Historia Naturalis 9.5.14 It is unclear whether Pliny's orca is the same as the modern orca; however, scholars in the 19th century identified the first orca discussed by Pliny as "the Delphinus orca of Linnaeus" based on the orca's behavior, whereas the orca who was stuck in the port as Ostia was more likely to be a "cachelot [sic]".citation = https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.02.0137:book=9:chapter=5#note2

I hope this helps, and I apologize for any issues of formatting etc. This is my first Wikipedia contribution! Thanks for all y'all do. Zethomas753 (talk) 18:13, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Zethomas753, that's good stuff! I have incorporated it into the article at Orca#Naming. Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Orca/Archive_6&oldid=1208904277"