Talk:Wild boar

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 16 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Brinturner, Josephlinger, Zackattack932.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

"sounders" and "matriarchy"

the first time the word "sounders" occurs, it should be explained. and the article says "female dominated sounders" with a link at "female dominated" to "matriarchy", which is about human beings, not pigs. This linkage is either ignorant or a form of original research by someone who really wants to compare human matriarchies with groups of wild pigs. --142.163.194.161 (talk) 22:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

References for setosus

@BhagyaMani The Boddaert citation isn't adequate to explain synonymy. This is the original description, but for it to be considered synonymous with scrofa there needs to a taxonomic review. Thus the additional source given. I am not sure why that citation was described as incomplete. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:33, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

A source without an author, year, publisher or journal is incomplete. The proper ref for synonyms is anyway MSW 3, unless a later revised taxonomy was published. – BhagyaMani (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I am not sure how that response addresses the issue. It appears that you are stating that setosus is not a vaid synonym. If that is the case it needs to be removed. I was happy to keep it, but it needed at least some valid reference to support it. Could you please supply a response to state why you think that setosus should remain, but without any valid citation. Also please explain the removal of the citation provided, instead of completing it if you think that it doesn't meet particular standards. Also there are no guidelines that I am aware of that state that a citation must have the characteristics that you claim. This is the recommended citation from the site in question "Sus setosus in GBIF Secretariat (2022). GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/39omei accessed via GBIF.org on 2022-12-23.". It states its source is TAXREF "Gargominy O (2022). TAXREF. Version 4.9. UMS PatriNat (OFB-CNRS-MNHN), Paris. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/vqueam accessed via GBIF.org on 2022-12-23.".

I would be helpful if you could explain yourself further. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

According to MSW 3, setosus is a syn of the nominate subspecies, hence not of the species, see Therefore I moved this entry. – BhagyaMani (talk) 16:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

References

Terminology

Could someone knowledgeable on the subject take a look at this section please. The first sentence seems vague, a couple of common confusions could do with clarification; the gender issue (acceptability of 'wild boar sow') and the plural issue ('wild boar' and 'wild boars'). Many thanks Obscurasky (talk) 14:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I am not sure what the confusion is. Boar and boars are both used as the plural form. What is acceptable in English is generally up to which audience you are aiming at. If you find 'wild boar sow' cumbersome then don't use it. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 09:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Could be nominated for good article

I see regular editors here have done an impressive job and if one of you is interested I think it is ready for Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions Chidgk1 (talk) 17:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)