Talk:Persian leopard

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

Scientific name[edit]

What is the correct name? Is it Panthera pardus ciscaucasica, as the article currently says, but I know it to refer to Caucasian Leopard, or is it Panthera pardus saxicolor, as it says on Commons and other sites? -SuperJew (talk) 09:23, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The numbers[edit]

Fewer than 5? Guys are you kidding? The species must be extinct on the specified countries.--92.45.207.50 (talk) 00:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Persian leopard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:45, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Persian leopard/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

page could use some more intext citations. Kpstewart (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 01:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 02:40, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Persian leopard[edit]

Due to the fact which persian leopard is native to iran and bigets number of leopards exist in iran more than 90 percent of leopardsand name is persian whay name of iran is not mentioned in the introduction textً and comtries like iraqor turkey or caucasia which has non or fwer than 10 leoprad mentioned as hNit of this leopard i think this text is anti iranian Bahmanrajabiun (talk) 19:09, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The lead was not intended to be anti-Iranian, but Iran was considered as part of the Caucasus, whereas the other countries are not. Since every country of occurrence is listed in separate sections, I deleted country names in lead. Hope this soothes your feelings. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

nationalism[edit]

Whay ? name of turkey is every where in this page? while turkey disent have even one laopard? And IRAN as the majir country habitat if this laopard bearly mentioned? I think this text is written by pan turkust groups. Bahmanrajabiun (talk) 11:01, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, a leopard was killed there recently, and I kept that information down there, in the section about Turkey. Leo1pard (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page views[edit]

Leo1pard (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why I merged Balochistan leopard into Persian leopard[edit]

See this. Leo1pard (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Leave as is for now but reconsider after the next report on scientific names by the Cat Specialist Group in 2022. Hopefully some Anatolian leopards might have been better studied by then.Chidgk1 (talk) 13:48, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@BhagyaMani, Leo1pard, Malcolmlucascollins, Leopardspecialists, and Artaxiad: I propose to merge Anatolian leopard into Persian leopard as the scientific name is the same.Chidgk1 (talk) 05:47, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chidgk1: I'm not as decisive as you are in this matter. Because imo, the Anatolian leopard page is dedicated to the (historical) leopard population in Turkey, or more particular in western Turkey. Although there is consensus about the *scientific name* for both populations, i.e. the Turkish and Caucasus ones, there is no consensus yet about the common name for this subspecies. Re scientific names: the oldest one has precedence over later names. But does this rule also apply to common names? If so, we'd have to merge Persian into Anatolian leopard page.-- BhagyaMani (talk) 11:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sensu stricto, the Anatolian leopard of southwestern Turkey is different from the Caucasian (formerly P. p. ciscaucasia) and Persian (formerly P. p. saxicolor) leopards, in the same way that the North Chinese leopard (formerly P. p. japonensis) is different to the Amur leopard (P. p. orientalis), so if there has to be a merger, partly taking into account the recent sightings of Persian leopards in eastern Anatolia, then I would support a merger under a scientific name Panthera pardus tulliana, or some other common name, if there is one, not under either "Anatolian leopard" or "Persian leopard", because these denote different populations that have been grouped together under one subspecies, like the names of the Amur and North Chinese leopards denote different populations that have been grouped together as one subspecies (Panthera pardus orientalis). Leo1pard (talk) 08:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC); edited 08:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The Anatolian leopard is not a Persian leopard. They were distinct populations described under a particular susbpecies name. That the differences are no longer considered sufficient to keep them as separate subspecies doesn't change the fact that different animals were described. A merger should be under the scientific name if that is the decision.
However, on balance I oppose the merger. The Anatolian leopard can pass the notability test. If we start following the species/subspecies taxonomy decisions strictly we will have to eliminate articles on notable subjects such as the Bengal, Siberian and Caspian tigers, the Indian and Barbary lions, etc. This is wrong. Wikipedia articles have to pass WP:GNG. Species or subspecies status can contribute towards establishing general notability; absence of such status doesn't make them non-notable, it just means other sources must be found.   Jts1882 | talk  09:00, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I too think: there is NO need to merge, as content of both pages is enough for stand-alone pages. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the Cat Specialist Group themselves, who revised the taxonomy of subspecies of leopards and other felids, said that it is possible that all Asian leopards, barring the Javan (P. p. melas) and Sinai-Arabian leopards (P. p. nimr syn. P. p. jarvisi), are one subspecies, in which case they could be grouped under P. p. fusca, and that the Arabian leopard might belong to the African subspecies (P. p. pardus), so it might be better to wait till they are certain about the subspecies, considering that we have already had trouble due to WP:conflicting pieces of work by members of the CSG on how many subspecies of another big cat species should be recognized. Leo1pard (talk) 10:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC); edited 10:18, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted this quote because a) the publication is already referenced in the page itself, WITH page numbers, so it's easy for EVERYbody to read it, hence no need for copy-vio text; b) the Cat SG's opinion is irrelevant in THIS context, which is about : merging or not merging pages !! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:53, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's the first time that I've seen you say "the Cat SG's opinion is irrelevant", considering what has happened before, be it for the subspecies of leopards or other species, but as it is, the Anatolian leopard is not the same as the Persian leopard, even if they belong to the same subspecies, in the same way that the Caspian tiger is not the same as the Bengal tiger, even if ditto, so I would oppose any merger of these articles for the time being at least. Leo1pard (talk) 12:46, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, apparently you did not grasp what I wrote. I'll therefore bold it for you: Cat SG's opinion is irrelevant in THIS context, which is about : merging or not merging pages; or in other words: THIS discussion HERE is about Wikipedia:Notability of 2 wiki pages, but NOT about validity of subspecific names. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have to merge P. p. tulliana into Persian leopard, but not 'Anatolian leopard'. Saying that we should merge Anatolian leopard to Persian leopard is same like saying that Caspian tiger should be merge to Bengal tiger because they're the same subspecies. I support the merge of P. p. tulliana to Persian leopard beacuse the scientific name was proposed for Persian leopard. -Punëtori' Rregullt {talk} 05:37, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced by this statement comparing peas and beans. And still think that each of the two pages is sufficiently notable and referenced so do NOT need to be merged. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure we need all the articles but don't think merging P. p. tulliana into Persian leopard is the best approach. Do we need the former if it covers both Persian leopard and Anatolian leopard?   Jts1882 | talk  09:00, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on, Panthera pardus tulliana is a redirect to Anatolian leopard so this merger proposal is the same as the original one to merge Anatolian leopard into Persian leopard. The redirect probably needs changing.   Jts1882 | talk  09:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your 1st suggestion that the redirect in P. p. tulliana should be kept as is, i.e. > Anatolian leopard, as this common name is connected with tulliana among Turkish scientists in particular. Whereas several Iranian scientists still used saxicolor in publications even after 2018. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I did not realise this would create so much discussion. Glad to see such interest. I don't understand why you say: "Re scientific names: the oldest one has precedence over later names". Could the article be titled with the current scientific name and all the common names be redirects? @Leo1pard: Could you explain to me as a layperson how "the Anatolian leopard is not the same as the Persian leopard, even if they belong to the same subspecies"? Is that because their ranges have been isolated from each other by humans so they are diverging genetically, or because they are physically the same but behaviourally different? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Chidgk1 : theoretically, it would of course be an option to use the subspecies's Latin name as page title. But its common name 'Persian leopard' has been used since at least 70 years, and is still used by people working on leopard in Caucasus region, Iran and farther east; while Turkish scientists use the name 'Anatolian leopard', which initially was understood solely for leopards occurring in western Anatolia. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:13, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

co-operation[edit]

Thanks for quick reply. Regardless of what happens with these articles do you know if there is any published info on co-operation between Iran, Iraq and Turkey on the conservation of the subspecies? Or indeed conservation problems due to non-cooperation?Chidgk1 (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. Re co-operation : not that I know of. Only of research going on in Iran and Azerbaijan at the mo. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 20:04, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Breeding habitats of the Persian leopard on the South Caucasus[edit]

Due to the fact that the territory of the Meghri region of Armenia is the hottest place in the Caucasus(record summer temperatures recorded in Meghri reached + 55 ° С + 60 ° С), the Persian leopard prefers the dry mountain-wooded zone of Meghri for its reproduction. The territory of the Meghri region of Armenia and the adjacent Araxes right bank zone of the Iranian Karadagh are the main breeding centers for the Persian leopard in the Caucasus[1]

External image
image icon Breeding habitat areas of the Persian leopard on the extreme South Caucasus and western Alborz mountains
External image
image icon Breeding habitats of the Persian leopard on the extreme South Caucasus and western Alborz mountains

.Armanum Luwian (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC) [reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000632071530077X#!
Hey. I read this article, and did NOT find a remark about Meghri being '... the hottest place in the Caucasus(record summer temperatures recorded in Meghri reached + 55 ° С + 60 ° С).' The authors of this article PREDICT that the Iranian part of the Lesser Caucasus is important for leopard reproduction, and the research this model is based on was carried out in IRAN, not in Armenia. This part between the <ref> .. </ref> IS indeed a WP:BAREURL. For these reasons, I will AGAIN remove your addition. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. It's good that you read the article. But I didn't said this article was talking about climate of the Meghri region. I brought article as a third citation, if you remember, for those excellent maps of leopard's habitats, which you called empty URL. About Meghri,as a place where hottest summer temperatures on the Caucasus were recorded, written in many English encyclopedias. And I explained that, so readers have full understanding of why Persian leopard prefer for they breeding habitats not the only protected by Iranian government wilderness of the Araxes right bank, but also Araxes left bank region of Meghri.Armanum Luwian (talk) 11:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AGAIN : this article within the bare URL does not provide ANY such info about temperature NOR about dry mountain-wooded zone in Armenia. You apparently did NOT notice, alas, that I referenced this article with proper citation in the section about Iran AND Armenia already. See WP:CITEHOW to learn how to cite. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I explained here already : see marked text above. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AGAIN : The thing you call “empty URL” is the best detailed maps of the leopards breeding habitats, and those maps are from the same article. Maybe you have a problem in your computer with the cookies and they are preventing you to see those maps. You need to clear your browser cache and restart computer, then you probably be able to see this maps.
We have a misunderstanding here: I did NOT call the url 'empty', but bare. Bare means without details about author/s, date + place of publication, please see Wikipedia:Bare URLs and avoid such bare urls in your future contributions. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 10:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AND AGAIN : I write down the information on the summer climat and terrain vegetation of Meghri region, so readers understand reasons why leopards prefer Megri along with Iranian Araxes righ bank wilderness for its reproduction.Armanum Luwian (talk) 01:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I understood your intent, but the article by Farhadinia et al. (2015) does not contain any such statements. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think there may be a misunderstanding of the objection to the new material. The second sentence is supported by the reference, which looks at the habitats and breeding grounds of Persian leopard. It locates and describes the habitats where they breed but says nothing about why they choose to breed there. The first sentence gives a reason for the choice of breeding habitats that is not supported by the reference. Even though it's a perfectly reasonably explanation, we are not allowed to add our own interpretations and conclusions, which counts as original research (see WP:POV). A rewriting of the second sentence to add a statement of fact about the type of habitat found in the breeding areas could be acceptable, although it should be added to an existing section. It would be best to discuss any such change here first. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment, Jts1882! I was thinking of inviting you to this discussion, as I was afraid that we are running into an edit war here. Re Farhadinia et al. (2015): I already added a short sentence about this area providing important breeding habitat in Lesser Caucasus. But they do not describe Meghri really, as they surveyed in Iran. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

Thanks for the explanations Jts1882. I’m actually gave description of Meghri region climate and terrain for the better understanding of this maps, because Meghri have actually a unique position, the southern,lower part of Meghri is locked by mountains from every side, like the Iranian right bank of Araxes adjusted to Meghri and other neighboring areas, and due to that it’s creates during pick of summer extremely hot temperatures with dry conditions. So, because of that mountain forests of that area is perfect for leopard’s breeding habitats.

Jts1882, can you please add this maps to the article the proper way with details about author/s, date + place of publication. Thanks.Armanum Luwian (talk) 05:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. About region of Meghri. For example, northern part of Meghri region is absolutely different. It’s high elevated, cold and moist.And as you can see on the maps, northern part of Meghri is not the area of leopards breeding habitat.Armanum Luwian (talk) 05:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal 2[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge. Chidgk1 (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Jts1882 and Chidgk1: I had a look again at our discussion during 2019. Seems our consensus was to postpone a (final) decision. In view of the backs and forths in the last couple of days in the ledes of both pages, it's perhaps time to resume the discussion. What do you think? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 00:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A brief : Since last year, Iranian scientists kept on using the name Persian leopard in combination with saxicolor. Some authors referred to Persian leopard and Iranian leopard in combo with tulliana. Turkish scientists used tulliana consistently with Anatolian leopard. So the naming scenario is as muddled as it was more than a year ago. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 00:01, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You guys know more than me. Do whatever is best for promoting conservation of the beasts. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jts1882 and BhagyaMani: Hello again. Since I found Sarı et al I have been wondering about this again. Would it be best to first sort it out in Wikispecies? Is P. p. saxicolor now a junior synonym of P. p. tulliana and if so should it be a redirect? Chidgk1 (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Glad that you are beginning to change your mind (?). Yes, since revision of felid taxonomy in 2017, Anatolian and Persian leopards are considered the same subspecies, after several people did not find any differences in morphology of museum specimens from Turkey and Iran. So I still think, it would make a lot of sense to merge these 2 pages. The question is only, under which common name – Anatolian or Persian leopard? A solution, at least temporarily, may be to use the Latin name as page title? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And again yes : both saxicolor and ciscaucasica are junior syns of tulliana. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support merging them both under the Latin name. Neither population on its own seems particularly notable, and the Latin name would avoid any region-related controversy. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes good idea to merge under the Latin name. Although saxicolor is now a junior synonym I think "Persian" can be mentioned first in the text as that population is probably larger. So hopefully both Turkish and Iranian nationalists will not whinge too much. I am happy to formally propose and do the merge on Wikipedia. But I don't have any experience with Wikispecies. Unless one of you already know what to do there I will read up on that first before coming back to merge here if there is consensus. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We may anyway first have to ask an admin to free up the redirect under the Latin name, once the merging is is consensus. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 20:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jts1882, Leo1pard, Punetor i Rregullt5, and Leopardspecialists: Your thoughts welcome. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re your changes in Wikispecies : the authority for tulliana is NOT (Schreber, 1777) but (Achille Valenciennes, 1856). And the vernacular name is Anatolian leopard, not Leopard. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 11:21, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Georgeryp: I think it was you who put (Schreber, 1777) - can you reply? @BhagyaMani: Unless I made a mistake I don't think it was me who wrote that for the vernacular name - but I have messaged you on your talk page on Wikispecies to ask your advice about vernacular names. Perhaps we should continue the conversation there otherwise future readers might get confused.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I think that was a bit too early to merge. You should have waited for at least another week to give others the chance to comment. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:03, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Persian_leopard&oldid=1010554989"