Talk:Bornean tiger

Size

BhagyaMani Now do you see where he talked about its size? Leo1pard (talk) 09:28, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Kitchener (1999) hypothesized that it might have been small, but did not write anything about actual size. He did not indicate that he had any body part or other evidence of a tiger from Borneo. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

I see, but that it was small like the Sumatran tiger was claimed by natives, and there were photographs of tigers in 1975, according to Meijaard. Leo1pard (talk) 17:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

You mean "He claimed not only to have seen a tiger near the S. Belayan (no. 6) in East Kalimantan, but he also took photographs of the animal. The two photos in his book clearly depict tigers. His explanation for this sighting was that in the past the sultans of Sarawak, Sabah, or Brunei must have imported these tigers from elsewhere.", referring to Dans la jungle de Borneo (1975)? Meijaard also says "Again it was said that the animal was faintly striped, and the size of a Sumatran tiger." None of it is enough to specify size in Wikipedia's voice.--tronvillain (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Not fully. That passage is only part of what I was looking at. Leo1pard (talk) 17:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Well, feel free to quote whatever else you think is relevant, but the paper doesn't even conclude that tigers ever existed on Borneo, let alone them them having a specific size. --tronvillain (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Tronvillain, for making that point! I would like to add: in the past 20 years since these articles were published, several teams from national and int'l universities and NGOs conducted surveys in Borneo using camera-traps. And in all those years, a tiger was not recorded, hence still remains "in the mists of mythology", as Meijaard (1999) wrote. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

References

Section on 'possible connection with Palawan'

@SilverTiger12 and Jts1882: this section is so filled up with speculations and WP:OR statements that it needs a thorough revision, imo. Perhaps even remove it completely? What do you think? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 11:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC) And @Nick Moyes: please also comment on and/or remove SYNTH in this section. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

On one hand, it seems to meet WP:GNG, on the other hand, it is a problematic article. Getting rid of the synth and OR would definitely help. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 15:46, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Took me a bit to realize you mean a subsection and not this article.... yes, that subsection is far too long in proportion to the rest of the article. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@SilverTiger12: I removed some content, which is not relevant in this context, imo. Please let me know what you think. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Pretty good. The background on the paleogeography of the area was "interesting, but highly irrelevant". What you replaced it with was a neat summary. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. This subsection is still quite long. What do you think of moving some of the details about measurements of fossil bones to the section Characteristics? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

That seems the natural location for it. To be honest, the whole massive section is altogether too big to read easily, so I'm fine with any changes you'd like to make. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Size and mass removals

SilverTiger12 Kindly read Page 35 of that book! Leo1pard (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC); edited 17:55, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

I have read it- the paragraph on the page does not in any way say that the Bornean tiger may have been similar in size to the Sumatran tiger. In fact, I cannot even see how you came to that conclusion while reading the paragraph in question. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

It says "small tigers on Sumatra and Borneo". Leo1pard (talk) 18:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

That still does not support the statement, and attempting make it so is WP:OR. Kindly cease and desist. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Then "small" would be appropriate, because that is exactly what the book says. Leo1pard (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

"Small" would be appropriate, a comparison in size would not. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:15, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The book is talking about a juvenile Bornean Tiger the size of a Sumatran Tiger. As an adult, it would be bigger than the Ngandong Tiger which is one of my favorite prehistoric cats and also bigger than Smilodon Populator which is the largest Smildon species. 209.122.93.183 (talk) 20:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Misinformation about its size and strength from fans of the tiger

Leo1pard, The Ngandong tiger is one of my favorite prehistoric cats, but they are like a leopard when compared to the Bornean Tiger. I think you are talking about a juvenile Bornean Tiger because the adult Bornean Tiger was 427 kg, 11.8 ft long and 4 ft at the shoulder. 209.122.93.183 (talk) 02:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello, but I don't think so. To the best of my knowledge, the Bornean tiger doesn't appear to have been that big at all! Pages like this are pieces of junk, made by fanatics who exaggerate the tiger! Leo1pard (talk) 16:11, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

I have proof that the Bornean Tiger is strong and large. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYciu2PHwLg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2aC_CMMK30&t=15s 209.122.93.183 (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

No, I have to say that this is a lie by lunatic fans of the tiger! Dizzy Rose admitted that the size of the Bornean tiger could either be over-exaggerated or under-exaggerated, with a minimum weight of over 59.31 kg (130.8 lb), that the sizes and weights were not confirmed, just estimates, and these were based on a fragmentary metacarpal! Even a cheetah, leopard and cougar can weigh over 60 kilograms (130 pounds), and you're saying that Dizzy Rose's videos prove that the Bornean tiger was bigger and stronger than the massive Ngandong tiger? Leo1pard (talk) 08:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC); edited 10:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

BhagyaMani I don't mean to make you laugh, but I wonder who came up with the idea that the Bornean tiger was bigger than a Ngandong tiger, weighing 427 kg (941 lb), and measuring 11.8 ft (3.6 m) long from head to tail, and 4 feet (48 inches) at the shoulder, when this video by a tiger fan suggests that it might not have been heavier than a cheetah, cougar or leopard? ;) Leo1pard (talk) 11:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Trolls. BhagyaMani (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)