Talk:Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus

This article was nominated for merging with Javan rhinoceros on 4 June 2019. The result of the discussion (permanent link) was "No consensus".

Extinction Mid‑importance

	This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Clean up language

The text appears to be substandard English, possibly a translation. Can anyone help with cleanup?

Kortoso (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have added an extinction tag here this probably is actually quite a good 'case study', and we have WWF people here in Cat Tien National Park at the moment.Roy Bateman (talk) 07:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stand-alone article

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 no consensus to merge the two articles. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Vietnamese Javan rhinoceros is recognized as a subspecies--not a mere population--of the Javan rhinoceros. As such, I believe that it should continue to have its own Wikipedia article. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 21:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No, subspecies generally don't have stand-alone articles, especially not when there is absolutely no unique info in the article, as in this pointless stub. FunkMonk (talk) 21:58, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure about your use of "generally." Two subspecies of Sumatran rhino, two subspecies of white rhino, and five subspecies of black rhino (some of which are extinct) have separate Wikipedia articles. I think that it is preferable for detailed information about the Vietnamese Javan rhinoceros to be included in a separate article so that the main article on the Javan rhinoceros does not become prolix. AuH2ORepublican (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In those cases, not that I agree they should be separate, they are much more than tiny stubs, like this one is. FunkMonk (talk) 02:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason we should not have an article about subspecies. If this was a one-line stub saying "Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus is a subspecies of Javan rhinoceros" I could see merging/redirecting but this article has enough information to support retaining it. Rlendog (talk) 20:49, 14 August 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.

Requested move 8 December 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:41, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus → Vietnamese Sunda rhinoceros – Fauna should use their common names for article titles Ddum5347 (talk) 02:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ddum5347 and Kevmin: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:08, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Controversial move, and NOT supported by naming rules or guidelines, which is to use the most commonly used, citable unambiguous name. This includes the binomial or trinomial. This user has been warned about making page moves before to made up names.--Kev min § 04:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This subspecies stub shouldn't even be a separate article to begin with, the discussion above didn't attract enough expert editors to be closed. FunkMonk (talk) 15:05, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The name is NOT made-up; many of the references used in the article use the proposed new article name. Ddum5347 (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2020 (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.