Talk:Unicorn/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

The Indian rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis)

A link to the living unicorn should be in the unicorn page. It is disappointing that Rhinoceros unicornis has been over looked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_rhinoceros Tom9152 (talk) 12:20, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Cute. — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

The real unicorn

The story of the unicorn really got going after the first crusade. Some crusader must have seen and described a white Oryx, "its like a small, white horse with two horns that from the side look like a single horn. After a few retellings by people who never saw the original Oryx this must have eventually become "It's a white horse with a single horn".

So the fabulous unicorn is created and seized on by story writers looking for some new inspiration for an increasingly literate market.AT Kunene (talk) 20:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, that might be what happened, but we can't put it in the article without a reliable source saying as much. Phiwum (talk) 11:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

And the presence of the unicorn in Physiologus, long before the Crusades, certainly conflicts with the notion of a crusader origin. Deor (talk) 11:53, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

A note relating to the unicorn deer in Italy. It appears this genetic defect is also common in Germany or Europe in general. A picture There's also an animal documentary with one caught on film. I couldn't find out the name of the documentary, though. It may not be so rare after all. Of course having a single non-branched horn in the center is rarer. Mightyname (talk) 19:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

New stub list

List of unicorns has just been created (totally unsourced) - I've tweaked the intro line to clarify its apparent scope, but Unicorn enthusiasts might like to have a look at it. I've added it to the "See also" of this article but am not convinced of its usefulness. PamD 15:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Antlers vs. horns

The roe deer is a deer, and as such it has antlers, not horns. I have changed the article to reflect this. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 02:40, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 August 2014

I think that the following page, already on Wikipedia, should be listed in the "See Also" section of the page for Unicorns.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin-you

The Sin-you is similar to the Qilin from Chinese mythology (already mentioned on the Unicorn page), but is definitively supposed to have only one horn, unlike the Qilin, which only occasionally is supposed to have one horn, but usually has two. The page seems well-referenced.

Sorry if I made this request incorrectly.

75.73.39.254 (talk) 01:02, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely. Good idea! Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 08:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 September 2014

206.177.43.72 (talk) 12:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The Canadian coat of arms also has a unicorn

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 19:12, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Unicorn/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Simon Burchell (talk · contribs) 09:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I'm quick failing this review on the basis:

• Whole paragraphs of uncited text.
• Inconsistent referencing styles.
• This article, while not terrible, still requires a lot of cleanup before it can make GA. At first glance, extensive see also section, mentioning unlinked terms in the text.
• Nominator is an IP and unlikely to follow-through were I to put a lot of effort into suggesting improvements.

Simon Burchell (talk) 09:28, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Additional comment

By coincidence I was planning to review this article, but I have arrived too late. I leave my notes here in the hope that they may be useful to the nominator in revising and resubmitting:

This article has the potential to be a GA after further work, but it is not nearly ready yet. The Immediate failure criterion 1 applies: there are two "citation needed" templates in place and there are more than a dozen other places where the same template could properly be added. There are entire sections without citations. For this reason the article immediately fails the GAN [as indeed it already has].

Less crucially, but still needing attention, the references section is a mess:

• references 2–10 all have an error message, "Check date values in: |date="
• "page" is shown as p. or pg. indiscriminately and with or without full stops
• some page ranges are given with a hyphen, and some with an en-dash (the latter is required by the Manual of Style)
• you give the locations for some publishers but not others
• ISBNs are a mixture of 10-digit and 13-digit versions – the MoS prescribes the latter (useful conversion tool here)
• you list some authors by Firstname Secondname, and others by Secondname Firstname
• retrieval dates (when given) are sometimes in "5 August 2013" form and sometimes "2013-08-10"
• there are several sites to which you provide a simple link with no site names, dates or publisher details (e.g. 13, 28, 29 and others)
• some of those sites look questionable as to WP:RS, specifically those for refs 13, 24, 28 and 30
• ref 29 takes me to Ringling Bros Circus site
• There are six books listed under "Sources" that don't appear to be sources at all – they are not mentioned in the text or references

I encourage the nominator to address these points and then resubmit the article for GAN. Tim riley talk 09:44, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, for the record, I agree with all of your comments. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 11:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2015

"The Bible also describes an animal, the re'em, which some translations have erroneously rendered with the word unicorn.[1]" Should read
The Masoretic Text of the Old Testament Bible also describes an animal, the re'em, which some translations have rendered with the word unicorn from the Greek Septuagint word μονοκέρωτος, which means unicorn.

References

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Your listed source doesn't mention "re'em" or "μονοκέρωτος" or "Septuagint" (except for titles on the page and links to other pages outside of the body). — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:10, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 May 2015

I want to edit this page because when I was a kid I believed in Unicorns and did plenty of research on Unicorns. I want to share what I used to believe in and help Wikipedia grow

Ivansux (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2015 (UTC) love Ivansux <3

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 18:09, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2015

I would like to add Julius Caesar's account of a one-horned beast in the Hercynian Forest written in his 'Gallic War' circa 50 BC (page 145, The Conquest of Gaul, Penguin Classics ISBN 978-0-14-044433-9). 'There is an ox shaped like a deer, with a single horn in the middle of its forehead between the ears, which sticks up higher and straighter than those of the animals we know, and at the top branches out widely like a man's hand or a tree. The male and female are alike, and their horns are of the same shape and size'.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Azraelhawke (talk • contribs) 21:17, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Please put this in "change X to Y" format, so I know to where you wish to add this. Dunkleosteus77 ^{(push to talk)} 03:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2015

207.224.177.34 (talk) 18:51, 9 September 2015 (UTC) unicorns are really zebras in disguise and they are throwing up rainbows in secret

Not done: you must provide a reliable source to back up zebras' true identity and gastrointestinal disorders. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:57, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2016

Please fix misspelled "Mythology" in subheading at end; it now says "Chinese Mytology."

170.149.100.10 (talk) 18:04, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for pointing out the error. Deor (talk) 18:21, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016

I would like to edit the text and correct certain parts of it

Meepppp (talk) 15:18, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

 Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 15:35, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016

Unicorns, which people think are myths, exist and bones of these creatures have been discovered in certain places- the unicorn, to many people, is a 'slim' rhinoceros- this is incorrect. Some of them were white with an elegant, lilac horn others may have been multi-coloured or just black. This is all true although many still think they are a myth

Meepppp (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Unicorn. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. KGirlTrucker81 ^{huh? what I'm been doing} 16:23, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2016

Unicorns are actually from Roman Mythology not Greek SteadyEddie18 (talk) 16:24, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- The Voidwalker ^Whispers 16:27, 20 November 2016 (UTC)