Jump to content

Talk:Polar bear/Archive 6

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

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2015

The paragraph below has a broken link. Citation number 173. Also, is incorrectly states that "the listing was not based on the best scientific and commercial data available, a view rejected by polar bear experts." Misleading readers to think it is the governors opinion versus the opinion of the polar bear "experts". However, the decision to list them is rejected by many polar bear experts, as can be seen the court briefing filed by the state of Alaska, which cites polar bear experts who disagree with the courts decision to uphold the listing.

Upon listing the polar bear under the Endangered species act, the Department of the Interior immediately issued a statement that the listing could not be used to regulate greenhouse gas emissions,[1] although some policy analysts believe that the Endangered Species Act can be used to restrict the issuing of federal permits for projects that would threaten the polar bear by increasing greenhouse gas emissions.[1] Environmental groups have pledged to go to court to have the Endangered Species Act interpreted in such a way.[1] On 8 May 2009, the new administration of Barack Obama announced that it would continue the policy.[2] On 4 August 2008, the state of Alaska sued U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, seeking to reverse the listing of the polar bear as a threatened species out of concern that the listing would adversely affect oil and gas development in the state. Alaska Governor Sarah Palin said that the listing was not based on the best scientific and commercial data available, a view rejected by polar bear experts.[3] In March 2013, a United States Appeals Court ruling upheld the "threatened" status of the polar bear against a challenge led by the State of Alaska.[4]

18.111.38.231 (talk) 04:03, 6 January 2015 (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.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  05:35, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Polar bear migration ref?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/polar-bears-migrate-to-no_n_6467876.html?utm_hp_ref=green

<ref name="Reuters 2015">{{cite web | author= | title=Polar Bears Are Migrating To Areas With Longer Lasting Ice | website=The Huffington Post | date=14 January 2015 | year=2015 | url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/14/polar-bears-migrate-to-no_n_6467876.html | accessdate=17 January 2015}}</ref>

I'm not sure where to insert it. Please go ahead and do so if you'd like. Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 23:23, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2015

Polar Pear19:44, 27 January 2015 (UTC)19:44, 27 January 2015 (UTC)19:44, 27 January 2015 (UTC)19:44, 27 January 2015 (UTC) Eaglestcs (talk) 19:44, 27 January 2015 (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.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  21:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

What do any of that weird xy stuff mean anyway? Lavinder111 (talk) 10:58, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

attacks on walruses

The article says: "Most attacks on walruses occur when the bear charges a group and either targets the slower moving walruses, usually either young or infirm ones, or a walrus that is injured in the rush of walruses trying to escape."

This sounds like something on television and nowhere else. It has no reliable source. The article says that there are no "groups" of polar bears.

Does anyone mind if I delete this?

I have placed a [citation needed] on it. If you can find the editor that made the edit, contact them directly and request the citation. Give it a little time before deletion. (Please remember to sign your postings.) __DrChrissy (talk) 10:17, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

There is one citation needed tag from 2011. How long might be long enough? Raggz (talk)

This claim is repeated in Walrus under predation, and sourced to "Ovsyanikov, N. (1992). "Ursus ubiquitous". BBC Wildlife 10 (12): 18–26." I couldn't access this source from my computer, although it definitely exists. "Calvert, Wendy and Stirling, Ian (1990)" corroborates this claim, at least in acknowledging that a polar bear may at times charge a group of walruses in order to get at a weaker member. However, the source doesn't seem to support the claim that "most attacks on walruses" occur in this way, so I am going to change the wording, and then remove the [citation needed] tag. --Sennsationalist (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Their probably is no reliable source for it then Lavinder111 (talk) 10:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

While I see no problem with the changes that have been made, there is no mention of groups of polar bears in the part that was originally quoted in the unsigned comment. It mentions groups of walruses. 2001:5B0:2475:1710:15A9:6BA9:6E58:6778 (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Bear dogs?

The following seems like vandalism: "however, dogs are the bears closest relatives as in bear dogs."

While bears and dogs are relatively closely related, the extinct bear dogs (another family of Caniforms)are irrelevant to this fact. Kdb1965 (talk) 10:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Polar bears and dogs have very little if any relationship to dogs! Lavinder111 (talk) 10:56, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

That makes no sense at all. The family Ursidae is closely related the family Canidae. Both are Caniforms, one of the two suborders of the order Carnivora. Also, dogs have very little relationship to dogs? I'm sure you meant to say something else there but it would have still been incorrect. 2001:5B0:2475:1710:15A9:6BA9:6E58:6778 (talk) 21:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Just noting that the previous comment was mine. I didn't realize I wasn't logged in. Kdb1965 (talk) 21:55, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Ursavus elmensis directly descends from the bear-dog. Bears have no closer relative. Crusafont, M., and Kurten, B. (1976). Bears and bear-dogs from the Vallesian of the Valles-Penedes basin, Spain. Acta Zool. Fenn. 144: 1–29.

I however am fine with it being edited out, I added it to explain why the two species might interact. Raggz (talk) 23:46, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Predictions

I plan to remove this "However, many scientists consider these theories to be naive;[34]" because it it not accurate. Most polar bear scientists believe that the polar bear can adapt to a warmer climate (as they did in the Eemian if they can compete with the more generalist brown bear. Besides the source is not scientific and the link has expired. Raggz (talk) 23:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Metabolism

First, someone tells me that a new study published recently in Science is already in the article, when in fact it quite transparently wasn't; second, this same someone doesn't appear to be able to grasp the findings and implications of the study, and so has asked for 'clarification'. Perhaps it is simply a case of WP:OWN, or perhaps the person concerned actually is this…

Point is, I don't know how to explain the results and implications of the study in any simpler way than I have done. I would have thought the Nature news source I used would answer any possible queries, but apparently the article is as impenetrable as my one-line summary of it.

Can someone suggest what I am supposed to do in order to provide the clarification asked for? I am at a loss. --YeOldeGentleman (talk) 13:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

It was me that made both these edits. In the first instance, I did not mean to say that the reference was already in the article, but the information the article was giving was already in the article, i.e. that Polar bears do not hibernate - feel free to add this new ref as a second citation in the relevant place. In the second instance [clarification needed] I left an edit summary asking that complete information for the citation is posted, especially because this is a GA. Can I very gently request that you don't start throwing around accusations of WP:OWN at editors without a bit more evidence - it simply raises the temperature on the talk page.DrChrissy (talk) 13:47, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Polar bear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Inappropriate sources

Many of the major sources used in this article are out of date (i.e., 20 years old) or are written by non-expert authors.

  • Aars, Jon, ed. (June 2005). 14th Working Meeting of the IUCN/SSC Polar Bear Specialist Group (PDF) 32. Nicholas J. Lunn and Andrew E. Derocher. Seattle, Washington, United States: IUCN. ISBN 2-8317-0959-8. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 April 2008. Retrieved 19 April 2008.
  • This source is out of date; the 15th Working Meeting was held in 2009 [1].
  • Bruemmer, Fred (1989). World of the Polar Bear. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Key Porter Books. ISBN 1-55013-107-9.
  • The author was a photographer.
  • Hemstock, Annie (1999). The Polar Bear. Manakato, MN: Capstone Press. ISBN 0-7368-0031-X.
  • Children's book by non-expert author.
  • Lockwood, Sophie (2006). Polar Bears. Chanhassen, MN: The Child's World. ISBN 1-59296-501-6.
  • Children's book by non-expert author.
  • Children's book by non-expert author.
  • Rosing, Norbert (1996). The World of the Polar Bear. Willowdale, ON: Firefly Books Ltd. ISBN 1-55209-068-X.
  • The author is a photographer.

This page needs to be updated and maintained using more recent references by expert authorities. For instance:

Note also that the USGS model presented in the article is also out of date. A revised version of the model was published in 2015:

See also the following. Note that the second link will be updated with a renewed status report in 2016:

Bueller 007 (talk) 00:19, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

I have been following your edits, and they are quite sober and useful. Go for it. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Polar bear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:03, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Polar bear. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:02, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Synonyms

Right now the taxobox lists the synonyms as:

  • Ursus eogroenlandicus
  • Ursus groenlandicus
  • Ursus jenaensis
  • Ursus labradorensis
  • Ursus marinus
  • Ursus polaris
  • Ursus spitzbergensis
  • Ursus ungavensis
  • Thalarctos maritimus

There is no source listed for the synonyms, but DeMaster & Stirling 1981 lists the following as synonyms:

  • Ursus marinus Pallas, 1776 [2]
  • Ursus polaris Shaw, 1792 [3]
  • Thallassarctos eogroenlandicus Knotterus-Meyer, 1908 [4]
  • Thalassarctos labradorensis Knotterus-Meyer, 1908 [5]
  • Thalassarctos jenaensis Knotterus-Meyer, 1908 [6]
  • Thalassarctos spitzbergensis Knotterus-Meyer, 1908 [7]

Wikispecies right now lists the synonyms as:

  • Ursus marinus Pallas, 1776
  • Ursus polaris Shaw, 1792
  • Thalassarctos eogroenlandicus Knottnerus-Meyer, 1908
  • Thalassarctos jenaensis Knottnerus-Mayer, 1908
  • Thalassarctos labradorensis Knottnerus-Meyer, 1908
  • Thalassarctos spitzbergensis Knottnerus-Meyer, 1908
  • Thalassarctos maritimus ungavensis Knottnerus-Meyer, 1908
  • Thalassarctos maritimus groenlandicus Birula, 1932

This seems more accurate than what's in the taxobox right now since, for instance, I don't think the combination "Ursus eogroenlandicus" was ever used. Umimmak (talk) 11:02, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2017

Please change "Polar bears are superbly insulated by up to 10 cm (4 in) of adipose tissue,[57] their hide and their fur; they overheat at temperatures above 10 °C (50 °F), and are nearly invisible under infrared photography.[59] Polar bear fur consists of a layer of dense underfur and an outer layer of guard hairs, which appear white to tan but are actually transparent.[57] The guard hair is 5–15 cm (2–6 in) over most of the body.[60] Polar bears gradually moult from May to August,[61] but, unlike other Arctic mammals, they do not shed their coat for a darker shade to provide camouflage in summer conditions.[62] The hollow guard hairs of a polar bear coat were once thought to act as fiber-optic tubes to conduct light to its black skin, where it could be absorbed; however, this hypothesis was disproved by a study in 1998.[63]"

To "Polar bears are superbly insulated by up to 10 cm (4 in) of adipose tissue,[57] their hide and their fur; they overheat at temperatures above 10 °C (50 °F), and are nearly invisible under infrared photography.[59] Polar bear fur consists of a layer of dense underfur and an outer layer of guard hairs, which appear white to tan but are actually transparent.[57] Two genes that are known to heavily influence melanin production, LYST and AIM1, are both heavily mutated and possibly nonfunctional in polar bears, leading to an absence of pigment in polar bear fur.[5] The guard hair is 5–15 cm (2–6 in) over most of the body.[60] Polar bears gradually moult from May to August,[61] but, unlike other Arctic mammals, they do not shed their coat for a darker shade to provide camouflage in summer conditions.[62] The hollow guard hairs of a polar bear coat were once thought to act as fiber-optic tubes to conduct light to its black skin, where it could be absorbed; however, this hypothesis was disproved by a study in 1998.[63]"

[6]

I think adding this sentence about the genetic reason why polar bear fur appears white would be an interesting addition to the information about polar bear fur.

Thank you! Dodget2 (talk) 22:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 01:49, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference hassett was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ U.S. to keep Bush administration rule on polar bears, McClatchy Newspapers, 8 May 2009
  3. ^ Joling, Dan (5 August 2008). "Alaska sues over listing polar bear as threatened". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved 29 August 2008.
  4. ^ Kendall, Brent (2–3 March 2013). "Court upholds polar bears as 'threatened' species". The Wall Street Journal (paper). p. A2.
  5. ^ DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.03.054
  6. ^ DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2014.03.054

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2017

in the United States, polar bears are threatened species. this indicates there is a real possibility that they may become extinct.The number of polar bears in Canada varies by locations. Princess2017 (talk) 14:56, 16 November 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. Sir Joseph (talk) 16:43, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Polar bear. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Arctic bear and Polar bear are synonyms

Arctic bear redirects to the polar bear wiki article.

An arctic animal is any animal that lives in the north polar circle, polar bears are one of them.

So of all arctic animals (arctic foxes, arctic lemmings, arctic wolves) only polar bears haven't been named here arctic bears.

So arctic foxes can be alternatively named white foxes, snow foxes and polar foxes, while polar bears cannot even be named white bears (which I am not asking for right now).

Just because a species of bear has a scientific name Ursus arctos, that doesn't mean that the term arctic bear is incorrect.

Is it arctic (lives in the north polar circle) = yes

Is it a bear = yes

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyrkin (talk • contribs) 17:09, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Would "arctic bear" make sense as a common name for this species? Sure. But people don't actually call it the "arctic bear"; the widespread common name for this species is just "polar bear". If people start using "arctic bear" and it catches on and reliable sources start noting people call this species "arctic bear", then it can be updated. The article should document what names are commonly used to refer to this animal, not suggest possible new names.
Edit, and if there are already reliable sources documenting this usage, great. But neither Arctic fox nor wikt:polar bear are reliable sources; see Wikipedia:UGC. Umimmak (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
During my extensive readings on polar bears throughout the years, I never read such name (actic bear). I someone has used it, it is definitely not scientific and not popular. It should not be included here. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
The logical thought process behind that is synthesis. – Rhinopias (talk) 21:59, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
How is it synthesis to say there's no evidence for a claim? If something doesn't appear in reputable, secondary sources then it shouldn't be in an article. Umimmak (talk) 11:54, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
My bad, I indented that incorrectly. Should've been…
here, replying to Gyrkin. Just following BatteryIncluded's lead! :P – Rhinopias (talk) 21:12, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Literally speaking, the polar bear is not the only bear in the Arctic Circle, if you know the Kodiak brown bear. Leo1pard (talk) 09:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Exchange over ice in the fall

This can't be answered by reasoning / derivation by editors. It's going to need information from a credible source. It is certainly possible for ice to break up when the (air) temperatures are dropping. And ice is more thermally coupled to the water than the air. Water temperature generally lags changes in air temperatures and could still be at the temperature to continue to melt ice even after the air temperature has started to drop. North8000 (talk) 17:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

@North8000: Well, as I understand it, the water and the wetted surface of the ice will be at the same temperature, about −2°C. When the air temperature drops below this the water starts to get colder and this causes more ice to form. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
@Eric Kvaalen: Mostly true except for "starts to get colder" is not synchronous with more ice forming. Looking at the microscopic level (the zillionth of an inch at the wetted surface) can be misleading. The water temperature that really matters regarding what's happening to the ice is the bulk water temperature near the ice. If it's below ~-2C the ice freezes more and above ~-2C the ice does some melting. So, in the fall, you, could have the water at +3C, the air gets cold and starts dropping the water temperature. But until it drops it to ~-2C (which could take days or weeks) the ice can still be melting. North8000 (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


@North8000: Well, I think that if you have a lot of ice floating in the sea, the ice will cool the water to its freezing point (−2°C) or else it will melt completely.

Come to think of it, we're going on a wrong premiss. The water (and ice) can cool off even if the air is warmer than the water – by radiation. The water surface radiates far-infrared radiation toward the sky. If this is greater than the sunlight (and moonlight!) that it absorbs, then it tends to get colder. In fact it is the earth's surface that heats and cools the air more than the other way around.

Eric Kvaalen (talk) 06:09, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

That's several new topics. The whole surface of the earth emits infrared tending to cool itself. Clouds, blue skies and the sun also do this towards the tending to heat the earth. You need a clear night for significant net cooling as you describe. And there's another huge factor at work which you haven't mentioned. The large amount of energy absorbed and released by the state change between water and ice, separately from temperature change. My initial comment was based on trying asses the result of dominant factors of the zillions of factors at work. Nice conversation! Northern (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Kevin Hart 2018 

Many studies show that Polar bears are very smart animals and are great with there small cubs.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Polar_bear/Archive_6&oldid=1027155583"