|WikiProject Cetaceans||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Hawaii||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
What was the other parent of Kekaimalu's offspring?
The wolphin's calves would have been either 3/4 bottlenose and 1/4 FKW or 3/4 FKW and 1/4 bottlenose depending on what she mated with. I'm surprised the article doesn't say which. 220.127.116.11 03:01, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
The MSNBC article referenced says it was a bottlenose. I've added this to the article. Rojomoke 14:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- The article mentions there are two wolphins in captivity, but as I understand it, the daughter of the first one wouldn't be a wolphin, it'd be a wolphinphin, or something. The article in general is a bit confusing overall- it took me at least three tries to understand the paragraph about "Kekaimalu" and offspring, though this might be because of the late hour. In any case, I do think that section needs a bit untangling. -- Sarrandúin [ Talk + Contribs ] 06:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I rather think we mean 'wholphin', not 'wolphin'. The father being a whale, not a wale (UNLESS - Jimbo was the father?!?). The raw numbers tell the same tale: wolphin vs wholphin.
-- Tom Anderson 2007-04-25 16:31 +0100
- Agreed, 'wholphin' is six-fold more common on the web, plus it's used by all the external links currently cited. I'll make the change now. –Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 14:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- ps Tom I notice you've made some really worthwhile contributions here (eg); have you thought about creating an account?
- The problem with using "wholphin" is that, it implies that if you don't have the whine-wine merger, you would use the wh sound. However, this never actually occurs before o; it's merged with 'h'. Consider "who" and "whore" etc. Still, if it's more common... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 11:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
In light of the above, presumably this page should now be moved to Wholphin. Any objections? Otherwise I'll move it and fix any redirects early next week. –Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 14:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused by the last reference in the article to the "great grey beast" of sealore. How is it known that this refers to the wholphin? What is the source of this interpretation? I think if it is true then it certainly valid to include it as it supports the idea that they occur in nature perhaps more than thought. However, without any qualification or explanation it seems little more than wishful speculation and is fairly hard to swallow.
- I agree, I cannot find a source for this either. Further, I think it'd be very difficult for a fisherman, or even an experienced marine biologist, to identify an unknown dolphin hybrid as being a Wolphin when spotted in the wild. BabyNuke (talk) 09:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I found a reference to this fact in a scanned and published book on Google with an ISBN number and real publisher. I feel this may actually be accurate. I am new to editing Wikipedia, so my apologies if I did not format the reference properly. Here is the link if it needs cleaning up: http://books.google.com/books?id=g5bOW53uOiwC&pg=PA215&lpg=PA215&dq=wholphin+%22the+great+gray+beast%22&source=bl&ots=5C5IK9AbF1&sig=5u_-L_cHII-xuyDLEOZ8bPz6ui4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=myDtTpnBL6ylsALBrNDbCQ&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=wholphin%20%22the%20great%20gray%20beast%22&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- That book is horribly unreliable as it gets even the definition of a wholphin wrong. I agree with Syounanwiki and BabyNuke – it's highly implausible that sealore would have a special term for such a rare and difficult-to-identify creature. The claim was initially added in August 2006 in this edit by an IP with a history of vandalism. It was removed and subsequently re-added with identical wording in this edit in September 2008 by an unregistered contributor with no prior editing, perhaps copy-pasted from an out-of-date Wikipedia mirror. The book provided by 126.96.36.199 was published in 2010, long after the dubious claim was added to Wikipedia. I've removed the claim once again as the citation was probably generated through citogenesis. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 06:29, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
The parents of the wholphin are in classed in different genera. This is most unusual as nearly hybrids occur between different species within a genus. Of course it could be that the classification of the parents is incorrect. Compare with Polar bear which was re-classified from Thalarctos to Ursus when it was discovered to produce hybrids with Grizzlies. Would this be worth mentioning in the article? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 08:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems pretty clear that the false killer whale is currently misclassified. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's somewhat unusual, but by no means unprecedented; other inter-genus hybrids do exist: see sheep-goat hybrid, beefalo, and cama (animal), among others. It doesn't mean the classification of the parents is incorrect, and probably doesn't need to be specifically pointed out in the article. ----Smeazel (talk) 12:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)