Jump to content

Talk:Kangaroo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 122.106.228.67 (talk) at 22:23, 9 February 2009 (Geographic or political locale). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Common myth?

Is there a reason for this section to be so prominent, or exist at all? There is no reference for this myth, nor that it is common. The writing also seems more like a parable than an encyclopedia. I think that the article would be stronger without this paragraph.Bob98133 (talk) 04:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the 'kangaroo'-'I don't understand' myth? Ashmoo (talk) 13:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if it wasn't clear. It's this section in Terminology that seems odd:
A common myth about the kangaroo's English name is that it came from the Aboriginal words for "I don't understand you." According to this legend, Captain James Cook and naturalist Sir Joseph Banks were exploring Australia when they happened upon the animal. They asked a nearby local what the creatures were called. The local responded "Kangaroo", meaning "I don't understand you", which Cook took to be the name of the creature. In 1892, the "Kangaroo" story was connected to the 1808 poem Mounseer Nongtongpaw, where the character John Bull refusal to learn French led him to believe that the French "Monsieur, je vous n'entends pas" ("Monsieur, I don't understand you") was pronounced "Mounseer Nongtongpaw" and that Mounseer Nongtongpaw was a mysterious beautiful woman.[9] The Kangaroo myth was debunked in the 1970s by linguist John B. Haviland.[10]
I think the article would be better without it. Bob98133 (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well I have heard the story told many times and a quick google of 'Kangaroo' and 'I don't understand' will bring up many pages that repeat the myth as fact (as well as debunking sites). However, you are correct that the story as it stands in the article in not well sourced. Ashmoo (talk) 16:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ashmoo - your rewrite is much more concise. Bob98133 (talk) 01:29, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italian version

The italian version of this article is here. http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canguro

Main article is semi protected, so I don't edit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanieleMinciaroni (talkcontribs) 15:25, 30 December 2008 (UTC) yep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.104.70 (talk) 15:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

farting unimportant?

The section ' Absence of digestive methane release' seems highly specialised for this article, especially after only two paragrpahs on digestion. Any expert comment? Earthlyreason (talk) 14:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two penises

I heard that the male kangaroo has two penises and the female has two external vaginas, and one in the pouch. Can this be confirmed, and if true, added?--90.216.153.192 (talk) 14:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Geographic or political locale

Should the sentence "Kangaroos are endemic to the continent of Australia, while the smaller macropods are found in Australia and New Guinea." be corrected to something like "Kangaroos are endemic to the Australian mainland and island of Tasmania, while smaller macropods are found across the Australian continent including the island of New Guinea." 122.106.228.67 (talk) 22:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]