|WikiProject Mammals||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Agriculture||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
Should I add "Extinct camelids" to the navigation template, or just create a new, separate template for them? --Jpbrenna 03:27, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- I'd say add them, but in a separate section on the bottom of the template...if it gets out of hand, they can always be extracted later and put in their own. Tomer TALK 20:09, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Removal of unsourced, poorly written section
I removed the following text from the article:
- An old camelid's body is set up mainly for dehydration and rehydration
- they have a plastic body temperature elliptical ergthrocytes and engage in
- seductive protection of plasma volume also they employ a system of
- buffered rehydration at the gut and blood stream level. Like the old wold
- camelids they new world camelids have elliptical red cels and similar
- anatomics features However dissimilar to oldworld camelids. New world
- camelids have hemoglobin with a higher affinity
I'm not entirely sure what it's supposed to mean, but my guess is it starts out referring to old world camelids, not simply "old camelids"... I have no idea what a plastic body temperature is, nor ergthrocites, elliptical or otherwise. What exactly is "seductive protection of plasma volume"? Argh. I could go on...and on... "old wold"? "rec cels"? "anatomics" ... there's punctuation missing, and the whole thing appears to end in mid-sentence. If I knew more about camelids, I could probably fix the text into something worth having in the article...but, alas, I don't... Tomertalk 22:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
On the Above and a rephrasing
- The above is poorly worded at best. The IP coresponds to someone that vandalized frat page article 'three times' running, and recieved a single warning. Then he did the edit above, so I think it an deliberate attempt at a hoax. That's it, four total on that IP.
- I also changed the 'sophmoric' edit to this: Wild populations of the bactrian camel have even adapted to drink brackish water, have been observed drinking some saltwater, and some herds live in nuclear test areas.
- The bit about nuclear test areas is very likely true—there are many accounts of animals living in radiates zones (Like Chernobyl <G>).
- I'm sure both the tail and head phrases are essentially correct. This transposed phrase: have been observed drinking some saltwater is more problematic and should require a cite, so I put an inline comment around it. I believe the adding contributor was transposing brackish for salt (i.e. mixing terms), which means he's flunking biology or just studying it, or hasn't gotten to it, though brackish waters certainly contain salts—so does my and your tap water.
- Salt and brackish differ in degree, so it's not unlikely in the way I worded it—I have severe doubts as whether that could or would be the sole water supply for the animal. So I make the distinction, I'm not editing here (despite appearances- I just happened through!), so someone who's involved will need to run that down.
I'll attach a CLEAN template here to attract some talent. And an Expert Template as well.
The text says camelid originated in the Eocene, but the pictures says Pleistocene, which is obviously wrong. The Pleistocene is even too late for when the text says camels started migrating out of NA.
What they really is, that camelids migrate, not origin. From User:4444hhhh
The Phylogenetic tree confused me and I couldn't find a source for it.
It seems to imply that alpaca existed before vicuñas when the article on alpacas says that "The closest living species are the wild vicuña, also native to South America, which is believed to be the wild ancestor of the alpaca".
There is a similar issue with the llamas and the guanacos. It seems to be suggesting that llamas and guanacos came into existence in the same time frame. But llamas are described as probably being derived from wild guanacos elsewhere in Wikipedia.
I am not an expert but this way of representing a phylogenetic tree seems unusual. I am more used to seeing the stick type or perhaps a cladogram which are less ambiguous. Davefoc (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
In the migration picture, it states that the Camelid family originated in North America during the Pleistocene. This is incorrect; Camelids originated in North America during the Eocene (~45 mya) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 18:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
There are some missing living members of the camolids one is the wild camel which has been proven to be genetically distinct from the bactrian camel and the other is the fact that there are two typs of Alpaca, one being the Suri alpaca and the other the Huacaya alpaca. this would make a total of 8 living camolids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dibe.bi.ee (talk • contribs) 04:49, 23 September 2013 (UTC)