Talk:Save China's Tigers

Tiger bone

Does the trade in tiger bone medicine have anything to do with the issue of trying to save this animal? Badagnani (talk) 04:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

Wow, so did SCT write their own article here or what? Sheep81 (talk) 05:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah this could definitely use some cleaning up. TennysonXII (talk) 00:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank God people have finally started to do something about degradation of the SCh tigers!

A very important and informative Article, a lot of thanks to the author of the English version because it is probably the best source of information about the REALLY crucial project to save the last remnants of the most endangered of all the tiger subspecies in the world. Ms. Li Quan did a remarkable step towards 1. new paradigm of the captivity breeding programs for the large carnivores 2. new paradigm of nature-saving in general because all the talks about re-wilding are have been just beautiful talks before and nothing more. I do hope she and her colleagues will succeed in adapting the South Chinese tigers in question to the wild environment. And MAYBE there is still hope for those unique animals. Thank you. If I can figure out how, I would like to help with translation into other languages. This information is needed, many people are interested and not all of them are entirely comfortable with English or Chinese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nestor notabilis (talk • contribs) 23:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

rehabilitating large cats back to the wild.

The article claims that no captive born large cat has been reintroduced back to the wild. This is not the case.

The story of elsa while born in the wild was raised in captivity (the important part as it means natural instincts and hunting ability is not learnt). Likewise the story of pippa the cheetah and also the leopard (all true stories written by joy adamson when living in kenya). Joys husband was a game warden, elsas mother charged him one day so he was forced to shoot- only then did they hear the cubs in the bushes. Two went to a zoo in england but elsa was taught to hunt and survive and was then released back into the wild (books by joy adamson: born free, living free, elsas pride). Pippa (book: the spotted sphinx) and the leopard (Book: Queen of Shaba) also had to be taught to hunt.

This was also done by Arjan singh an indian conservationist, books tiger tiger and tiger haven. In this case the cub was actually born in an english zoo. Indeed there were many conservationists who were against the reintroduction as it is thought that the tiger in question may not have been pure bengal but half or quarter amur.

It is totally possible that the type of reintroduction you are doing is new? though surely a reintroduction is a reintroduction in which case this is not the first time (e.g. the tiger above). There are many things that will be different, however these are surely useful reading and essential research before attempting something so similar? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.170.221 (talk) 11:31, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Effects on South Africa Ecosystem and Biodiversity

There is an editing war going on with Nroets and many other members of the Wikipedia committee, Nroets keep editing and removing relevant information, huge chunks of them from the above stated page. Many users have tried to undo his edits, but he refuse to back down and led to editing wars. What is worse is that he is a Pot calling a Kettle black, complaining and asking his rivals to be blocked despite himself being one in wrong.

Nroets removed a fully referenced subsection, known as the "Effects on SA Ecosysytem and Biodiversity". I want to clean up and to just edit that subsection accordingly and has mentioned it in his talk page, but he just removed the entire subsection without valid reasons.

What he does is weird because the whole section and subsection has been there for over 3 years, just waiting for some minor clean up, and updates, however he is removing the whole chunk and adding his own little tales in it. How can the subsection be updated or clean up then? We are just trying to keep the page's integrity, trying to edit and update when neccessary, not removing whole chunk of information which has been here for over 3 years. What is the use of removing everything and adding a few words with no references. If there is any need to edit, it should be to edit and update the page from its originality, not remove everything. That has never been the policy of wikipedia. NicRoets, please read this.

China's Tiger (talk) 03:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

The only reference in this section is what the organization says about itself. And the content is quite vague about important matters: Will there be wardens and who will pay for them and for how long ? There is no commitments about cheetahs, so if there is a lack of money, it may never happen.

If you are familiar with South African conservation, you will know that there are many farms being turned into reserves right now . The independent media covers these projects from time to time and Wikipedia should rather cover those projects. Then WP will be more credible. -- Nic Roets (talk) 09:50, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Nic Roets, I would like to verify what you mean by "[...] Wikipedia should rather cover those projects. Then WP will be more credible." The procurement and conversion of sheep farms by Save China's Tigers seems relevant to the article, since it is a feature of the project's history and a component of it conservation value.

I understand that you are following the be bold policy of Wikipedia and are concerned about the verifiability of WP's content, and I furthermore do not necessarily contest to your edits (as the article is still written like an advertisement and lack verifiability in many parts), but please avoid edit wars. If you remove content and your edits are reverted for reasons other than vandalism, rather discuss your removal of content in the talk page before reciprocating the edit conflict. Alternatively, you can add citation needed or other templates and give editors some time to provide references or improve the content later.

I do agree that it is subjective as to when enough time has been provided before removing poorly cited or non-neutral content and this is why I feel that adding citation needed or similar templates while discussing the removal of content on the talk page prior to removal provides editors with an opportunity to request more time to find citations or improve the content (with the exception of unverifiable material on living persons, which should be removed immediately).

I hope that you understand my concerns. Thank you.

Dremagon (talk) 22:05, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps covering those projects is not the best idea. A better idea would be to find media reports indicating how many hectares of South African farms have been converted into conservation areas during the last few decades. Then we add a sentence saying that the effects of Laohu Valley is part of a broader trend. Then it will sound less like an advertisement. -- Nic Roets (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

However please consider WP:BALL. That means we can only includes facts. For example if SCT placed money in a trust fund to make the reserve a reality in the event that the project is cancelled for whatever reason. -- 23:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nroets (talk • contribs)

Dear Nroets,

Thank you for taking your time to read, instead of just reverting the article back. As you can see, more wikipedia members and administrators have arrived to try editting and modifying the article(subsection) accordingly. I have to admit that this subsection is far from perfection, however it is not neccessary to fully purge it. There is a need to edit it accordingly, updating it and correct it, and this will be carried out by me as well as others from the wikipedia community. For your first point, yes it is true that many of the references in the subsection is from SCT itself, but as mentioned the subsection is not perfect and as time passes, we will sought for more references and the article will be more neutral and also better sourced. It does not call for a complete removal of the whole section, if you realize. As for your 2nd point, yes it is true, many reserves in SA which exists right now are converted from Defunct sheep farm. However how many people in the public(outside SA) knows about this? How many people in the world knows about this? I bet not much. Apparently SCT receives many emails asking why they are bringing exotic species to south africa and destroying healthy habitat. Most people did not know that Laohu Valley was converted from sheep farms, many thought that Laohu valley was a reserve before and Chinese Tigers were brought and destroyed a healthy ecosystem. This subsection is to inform others that the Tigers actually contribute in building a entirely new ecosystem where they serve as top of the food chain.

Like i said, the article is not perfect, and needs to be edited. Time is needed to edit and update it, by me and other members of Wikipedia. Removing it is not the key to solving the problem.

Cheers. China's Tiger (talk) 10:15, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Save China's Tigers. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929122435/http://www.dimsum.co.uk/features/rewilded-saving-the-south-china-tiger.html to http://www.dimsum.co.uk/features/rewilded-saving-the-south-china-tiger.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.laohuvalleyreserve.org/background/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110215024722/http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/255 to http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/255
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110215024722/http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/255 to http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/255

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 16:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Save China's Tigers. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728001304/http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/572 to http://english.savechinastigers.org/node/572

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 23:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)