Talk:Elk

Etymology

I have largely rewritten and somewhat expanded the etymology section, since it didn't say much on the word "elk" itself, which is obviously crucial! GPinkerton (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Dupcite

MONGO when you have two sentences supported by the same cite. You don't have to use the cite twice in a row. See Wikipedia:REPCITE LittleJerry (talk) 16:31, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

You can try and combine the sentences into one but since specific potentially questionable data is mentioned in each sentence, each needs a direct citation supporting it. REPCITE is not policy...its not even a guideline, but repairing dead links is part of our recommended guidelines. Whether you use your username or an IP, please do not simply remove material that should be updated with new and recited. You took an already weak section and rather than repair it, you just dumped half of it. This is not the first time you have done this to this article, so I'm inclined to do what I can to prevent you from effecting further changes that are detrimental.--MONGO (talk) 08:05, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

The link wasn't dead. It moved to the main National Elk Refuge. When I looked up the elk article, it did not support the text. I'm not obligated to replace it. LittleJerry (talk) 12:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

I was able to update the data and find a RS in 5 minutes.--MONGO (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Distribution map

At the moment, it shows the current and former native ranges of the elk. This is great and informative. But would it be possible to add a third layer to show introduced ranges? The articles mentions the Appalachians, Ontario, and Argentina, and it would be interesting to see this displayed visually. Idk how to do it, but maybe someone more skilled could take a shot? Blob401 (talk) 03:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

First off, great idea. Secondly, elk have been REintroduced to the Appalachians and Ontario, not introduced. They've only been introduced to New Zealand and Argentina. But I agree. Ddum5347 (talk) 04:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Name

Shouldn't the article be renamed "Canadian Deer" as technically calling the animal "elk" is an error even if it is one commonly used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isenhand (talk • contribs)

No. Ddum5347 (talk) 14:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, hard no. Probably the worst solution possible is to make up a novel new name that nobody uses.See Talk:Elk/FAQ. It would also be nice if you bothered to learn how to use a talk page and how to sign your posts. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

not the largest

you literally said "it is often confused with the larger moose". THE MOOSE IS FROM CERVIDAE!!! THE DEER FAMILY!!!! 206.84.143.69 (talk) 10:42, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't have to be from the same genus to be confusing. They are both very large and some moose are smaller than some elk. Dger (talk) 02:33, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

They're clearly not the largest, since the page says that elk average 0.75 meters at the shoulder. I tried to correct it from the source, but that's what the source says. At almost 3 meters long, that ranks elk as the largest daschunds in the world, not the largest ungulates. --Rvanarsdale (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm pretty big

I mean, I guess, but c'mon.

There's quite clearly a range of heights, from .75 meters (2 ft 6 in) to 1.5 meters (4 ft 11 in). That's about 5 feet at the shoulder, not the top of the head, for a large bull, which would have a length at the top end of the range. Adult Roosevelt bulls are actually quite impressive in person, but much smaller than, for example, an adult bull Alaska moose. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

remove the photo of the meat?

the article is on elk, not elk meat. 206.84.143.69 (talk) 10:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't elk meat come from elk? Just asking. Dger (talk) 02:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

It sure does, and the image is in the section that discusses the meat, so I don't see the point of this suggestion. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Article name

Considering that elk is a common name for both Cervus canadensis and Alces alces wouldn't it make more sense for the articles for both these species to use their alternative names? Having this article be named elk is confusing. It would make more sense to have instead of the current "Moose" and "Elk" to have "Moose" and "Wapiti" and to then move "Elk (disambiguation)" to "Elk". -- PaleoMatt (talk) 20:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Please read the various previous discussions of this in the archives, in particular this exact idea has been previously rejected. Also see the FAQ at the top of this page, and the edit notice seen when editing the article. Iff you believe you can overcome those objections with some new argument, I'd suggest a formal requested move for both articles. Keep in mind WP:COMMONNAME as well as WP:ENGVAR when researching those are going to be the highest hurdles you would need to overcome if this proposal is to have any chance of success. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

"while healthy bulls have never been recorded to be killed by bears and such encounters can be fatal for bears" (GYE)

This is not true. Healthy bull elk have been killed by bears. The study (linked below) gives the record of two mature bull elk in good physical condition killed by a black bear in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.

Predation by Black Bear on Mature Male Elk Author(s): William J. Barmore and David Stradley Source: Journal of Mammalogy , Feb., 1971, Vol. 52, No. 1 (Feb., 1971), pp. 199-202 Published by: American Society of Mammalogists

(https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1378446.pdf?casa_token=BHpPcT7IWYwAAAAA:39T1ExhuRUEWfhd5bGdHk_ylox1iFNhjTHhb86CaQD8jpSUFaBL6_RsRVQx4ME3Kk-4Xu87NR5pd2fIxAwKL-Omg83CnkzjNVP10NBruWdeZEFhpIew)Gimly24 (talk) 14:06, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Also, the study published in 1971 proves that they are not immune to bear predation. This former discussion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Elk/Archive_4#%22immune%22_to_bear_attacks?) was made without knowing of the article existence or that the reference given by the users did not mention the article. I would like people to read the article of 4 pages by Barmore and Stradley to correct this idea and to confirm that a revision of this section is needed on the main page. Thanks much. Gimly24 (talk) 14:21, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore, the former discussion is possibly a case of misidentification of the prey species. As quoted in the study linked in the archived discussion : "Records of the Olekminsky Nature Reservation during 1988-1999 show 13 ungulate deaths from the brown bear, including 11 A. alces, one Randifer tarandus and one Cervus elaphus. Brown bear attacks on adult male elk are never successful. Even a weak male elk can resist a bear. In October 1980 a big six-year-old brown bear was found dead after crushing an exhausted five-year-old A. alces. A necropsy revealed the brown bear suffered acute abdominal trauma."

Moose are referred as "Elk" in this article, typical of the common name used for them in Europe. The sentences in bold show that they use the term "Elk" for Alces alces (Moose). Gimly24 (talk) 14:29, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

In brief, there is at least one open-access article about bear predation on healthy bull elk, and to add, it take place in the exact region of the sentence. The replies I made following the first entry of this section of the talk page concerns how a misidentification of the prey species in a former discussion could have resulted in the sentence being included (by mistake) in the article page.Gimly24 (talk) 14:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Pop by US state

Hello @LittleJerry: I think we should keep this. These areas are larger than some countries and WP:NOTPAPER. Invasive Spices (talk) 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@LittleJerry: I also agree this should be put back - one person shouldn't get to dictate what stays on a page based on their personal opinion (Jakobees (talk) 15:32, 17 July 2022 (UTC))