Talk:Orca

Untitled

Older issues:

Talk:Killer whale/General archive 1

Talk:Killer whale/Should the page be at Orca or Killer Whale (resolution: Orca (Dec 2003); Killer Whale (Jan 2009))

Talk:Killer whale/Is it a dolphin, a whale, both?! (resolution: both)

Talk:Killer whale/Aug 2004-Apr 2006

Talk:Killer whale/April 2006-May 2008

Talk:Killer whale/May 2008-November 2009

Talk:Killer whale/March 2013-June 2013

Conservation

The Killer whale is listed on Appendix II of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS). It is listed on Appendix II as it has an unfavourable conservation status or would benefit significantly from international co-operation organised by tailored agreements. In addition, Killer whale is covered by the Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas (ASCOBANS), the Agreement on the Conservation of Cetaceans in the Black Sea, Mediterranean Sea and Contiguous Atlantic Area (ACCOBAMS), the Memorandum of Understanding for the Conservation of Cetaceans and Their Habitats in the Pacific Islands Region (Pacific Cetaceans MOU) and the Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Conservation of the Manatee and Small Cetaceans of Western Africa and Macaronesia.

Edit request on 13 October 2013

At the end of the first line under the subheading "Types" please add:

"although large variation in the ecological distinctiveness of different killer whale groups complicate simple differentiation into types. Pjndebruyn (talk) 23:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

 Done by Apokryltaros — Reatlas (talk) 09:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

better graphics

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/cetaceans/killerwhale.htm

This page has better detailed range maps and better pictures of the various types. It would be good if someone could look into using these for the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.89.230 (talk) 01:03, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

New / substituted citation to replace dead link

Reference 187 is a dead link. Substitute the current reference for this open access peer-reviewed paper in a scientific journal which is a better reference: Parsons, E.C.M. (2013)Killer whale killers. Tourism in Marine Environments 8(3): 153-160 http://docserver.ingentaconnect.com/deliver/connect/cog/1544273x/v8n3/s4.pdf?expires=1384641825&id=76265000&titleid=75000210&accname=Guest+User&checksum=1E159CD44CEFF602C754C182E1570EF6 ECM Parsons (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: It doesn't seem to be a dead link and the link you provided has expired, so I can't determine whether it supports the text. Also, you need to exercise caution when asking to have a paper which is apparently written by you inserted into any article. Please read WP:COI. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Can we cease referring to these animals "Killer" since they are not a threat to humans?

It seems strange that we call these animals "killer" since they only kill other animals for food. Perhaps human should be called "killer ape" since we are an apex predator as well. The only deaths associated with these animals have been while they were in captivity and under the care of humans. I welcome any discussion on this subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.143.221 (talk) 06:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

• agree, see under common names: According to some authors, the name killer whale would be a mistranslation of the 18th century Spanish name asesina ballenas which means literally whale killer.[16] Basque whalers would have given it such name after observing pods of orcas hunting their own prey. I think we should invert the situation - so that the title of the article is Orca, and the popular name killer whale is in the text as an AKA. --Megustalastrufas (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

This page is a feature article so it will require a more senior member to make the changes.Skrivitor (talk) 18:18, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about seniority, but I think we would need to allow for extensive discussion first, as we did last time the name was changed. See Talk:Killer whale/Should the page be at Orca or Killer Whale. --Avenue (talk) 23:53, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Avenue, I didn't see that conversation. It seems like calling the creature a "killer" insinuates a certain level of ferocity that simply does not exist, even if it is a cultural norm to use the term. Orca are currently used for entertainment and profit by a variety of organizations world wide and in addition, their natural habitat is being destroyed by human activity; changing the name to Orca would be one way we could give them an advantage in public opinion. Use of the term "Killer" may skew an individuals view of the creature and cause them to pass a negative value judgement.

In the 2009 naming survey, Orca was Supported 10-6 Skrivitor (talk) 04:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Activism is prohibited on Wikipedia. See WP:ACTIVISM. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I grew up in an area with large populations of orcas (as in, they regularly played in the wake of the ferry boat that connected our island to the mainland). Everyone called them orcas. It baffles me that anyone would call them "killer whales." After reading the old discussion, I don't understand why the title of the page was changed to "killer whale." Please change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.96.150.19 (talk) 15:54, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

You are not allowed to use Wikipedia to attempt to influence public perception of Killer Whales. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 19:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, Wikipedia is not the place for activism. Otherwise, should we change the name of "Gorillas" because the word "gorilla" is derived from an ancient Greek legend of monster-women, too? I mean, if we intend to steer away from "insulting" names, then why should we use "orca," given as how it's derived from an ancient word for "sea monster," instead of "killer whale"?--Mr Fink (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

On the other hand, "orca" saves on word count. CMD (talk) 20:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I apologize to all users for having used Activism-like language in support of changing the article from Killer Whale to Orca. It is my opinion that the term Orca is more neutral than the term Killer Whale. It is my belief that the term Orca is more commonly used among my social and geographic cultural group. If it is necessary, I will not object to this discussion being removed from the talk page.Skrivitor (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

This discussion is missing the fact that anything on wikipedia influences public perception. By your logic there can be nothing on wikipedia. No matter if we call it Killer Whale or Orca we'll still be influencing public perception. It's just a matter of which way people will influence it. It seems clear from people like Mr Fink deleting my earlier comments that this talk page is not a space for genuine discussion on this matter. --Chrissy9876 (talk) 02:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I deleted your comment because talkpages are not the place to accuse other users of engaging in an alleged conspiracy to oppress "orcas" by calling them "killer whales."--Mr Fink (talk) 03:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

You are correct in that this talk page is not the place to take issue with Wikipedia’s policy against activism. 76.107.171.90 (talk) 03:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Why is the article called "Killer Whale"? I understand that WP has a policy on common names but I'd say over the last couple of decades that Orca has been becoming fairly common as well. I mean, why can't the article be called Orca and Killer Whale redirects to it? Wikipedia is meant to be educational, isn't it? The article on Ted Kaczynski isn't called "The Unabomber", the article on Operation Overlord isn't called "d-day". This seems like a really silly, unacademic adherence to WPs common names policy.

123.243.215.92 (talk) 03:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)