Talk:Leatherback sea turtle/Archive 1

Turtle teeth?

Here's a question. I saw this picture that someone had taken of a leatherback turtle that had washed up on a beach in Ireland (how it got all the way up there, they don't know yet), and was rather stunned:

http://cr0y.waffleimages.com/files/65/65e0be9efe109265d09b57ff900b74ce2a67a171.jpg

I thought that turtles don't have teeth? And if those aren't teeth what are they?

They are modifications of the esophagus that help to hold food while sea water is pushed out of the mouth (to reduce salt intake during feeding).

• they're spines to retain food like jellyfish, etc. a google search for 'leatherback' and 'mouth' will yield more info. 71.136.44.70 10:44, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Metres vs. Meters

1. The Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Scientific_style says: For units of measure use SI units, unless there are compelling historical or pragmatic reasons not to do so. The SI unit of measurement is the metre. The variant American spelling, meter is not the name of the SI unit, but is correct in American English. Nonetheless, it does not trump the standard spelling.
2. The Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English says cIf all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article. This spelling has been stable and accepted in the article November 12, 2004, and has been retained through a long history of edits.

Thus, "metre" should be retained. Guettarda 18:55, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

HUGE!!!

I actully went to jekyll island for research, and when i saw the size of a leather back turtle, i was suprised, beacuse it is HUGE!

I've seen a speciment in a museum when I was young. Being 4 feet tall at that time, it was hard for me to believe that it was only 6 feet long. I guess that's how fishermen stories are made.--92.118.191.48 (talk) 19:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I know these guys are big but do the front flippers REALLY grow to as much as 2.7 metres--nearly 9 feet? Is that perhaps their "wingspan" instead?PurpleChez (talk) 15:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

For the record

Someone had written 'boobies' next to one of the content pieces. I deleted it, but the fact that someone still wrote it there counts as vandalism, right? these are so beautiful

I admire both that majestic testudine and the woman anatomy, but I think you did well for erasing that.--92.118.191.48 (talk) 19:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Temperature Conversion

An 18°C difference in temperature is only a 32.4°F difference, not 64°F that the article uses. It is incorrect to add the 32°F constant when disussing the difference between temperatures. I have corrected this. 74.108.134.40 05:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)amarshal@wlu.ca

Seems too fishy to be true

I found this in the article: "Nets are purposely set for other kinds of sea turtles in some areas of Puerto Rico. Though they are not intended for Leatherbacks, some are occasionally caught. Despite its illegality, the practice continues. Leatherback Turtles are usually caught up in long nets which can be up to 100km long. What happens to them after they are caught they either get thrown on the fishing deck or thrown away."

First of all, a net that long would be close to the length of the entire island of Puerto Rico, so I don't believe it. Second, the last sentence is sorely ungrammatical. Finally, none of this stuff -- even the first sentence -- contains a cite to a better reference.

Things like this appearing in Wikipedia are the reason people don't trust it as a "real" encyclopedia. I don't have the knowledge to accurately revise this, however, so I didn't take it out.

I call that NPOV; Besides, it's not even cited, and I'm feeling bold. it's going. Sneakernets 08:28, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Homosexuality

Why is Dr. James Cochran's sexuality worth mentioning? It's irrelevant in the context of turtles. The only way would be as a possible motivation to investigate this particular behaviour, and since there's no source that this is the case, it shouldn't be mentioned.

He doesn't seem to exist as a public figure. I figure, someone out there is posting attack edits on a guy with that name. Sheer malevolent vandalism. Shrumster 04:58, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed rename to Leatherback turtle

I say we bring this baby back to Leatherback turtle. In my experience, that's the more common name over the current one. While it's not a final indicator, "Leatherback turtle" gets 163,000 ghits while "Leatherback sea turtle" gets less than half that at 72,300 ghits. Shrumster 06:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

If there aren't any objections, I'll be proceeding with the move soon. Shrumster 05:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Done, thanks! Shrumster 14:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Placeholder/adding later

to add later: Mesodermochelys, Corsochelys Shrumster 17:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

mobility

leatherback turtles have paddle like flippets so tey can mave place to place and their shell helps them to glide threw the water. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.125.51 (talk) 15:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Top Speed

I think it's worth pointing out that the speed of nearly 10 m/s is for a swimming turtle - had me confused for a minute til I checked the reference! I will add a rough edit, but if anyone wants to make the sentence flow better then feel free. 195.27.12.230 (talk) 13:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Central america?

Why is this article under wikiproject central america and southeast asia? If it's because they nest there, then should it also be under wikiprojects for africa, florida, south america and austrailia? somene please explain. Michael1115 (talk) 01:11, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

My thoughts exactly. For a species this widespread, they shouldn't be in *any* country's wikiproject at all, imho. Shrumster (talk) 07:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Should I remove the tags then, or wait a while? they just had this discussion in talk:Cattle Egret and decided to remove the tags. Michael1115 (talk) 02:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup, feel free. Shrumster (talk) 08:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No bold for Latin name

Hi Shrumster, Per your undoing of my edit on 16 January 2009. It is not conventional to have the scientific name in bold after the title of the article unless there is no common name. (See Opheodrys vernalis, Hellbender, Lissemys punctata, etc.) I'm not up for an editing battle, but with a very common and unique English name for this animal, the Latin shouldn't be in bold. Struhs (talk) 23:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

See Agkistrodon piscivorus, Crotalus ruber, Python reticulatus, Eunectes murinus, etc. . Shrumster (talk) 01:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You just illustrated my point. Those are species with more than one common name in English. I can only assume you are unaware of the naming conventions for fauna. If there is a single common name, then the article should have that name. If there are multiple common names, the article should be titled by the Latin name. Struhs (talk) 16:36, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Not that I want to spend any more of my time discussing this. Coronella_austriaca, Python timoriensis, Apodora, Bothrochilus, Antaresia stimsoni, Antaresia maculosa, Morelia boeleni, Morelia carinata, Morelia oenpelliensis and Morelia viridis to state a few examples. I'd also like to point out that the official Naming Conventions have no specific preference between what's bold and not bold. Nothing about anything having "one common name". Shrumster (talk) 17:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Right then, it doesn't say "one commonly used" - it says "most commonly used". Let's look at two articles (that are correct) as examples of what I'm talking about. In the case of Agkistrodon piscivorus, the title of the article is the Latin name since the snake has several common names. However, the title of the article Beaded lizard is in English because that name is pretty much the only name in English by which the animal is known. The naming conventions do not talk about bold; this all began because of titling. The whole discussion is based on the statement you made regarding scientific name as the name of the subject. That is not the case in the two articles that initiated this talk - Leatherback turtle and the Chinese giant salamander. Struhs (talk) 21:23, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Decomposition

Surely all (or the vast majority) of decomposing animals are their own micro-ecosystems. Bacteria and inverts commonly invade a carcass. How is this seen as special to a Leatherback? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.44.1.153 (talk) 06:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Lol dunno, maybe because a dead LBT is some form of an organic bunker I guess...--94.65.75.89 (talk) 10:45, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Distribution

I suggest two changes for the leatherback page:

There is no leatherback nesting in the Mediterranean. This is backed up by an IUCN Marine Turtle Specialist Group recent publication and a peer reviewed paper from 2003. Ref: http://www.iucn-mtsg.org/red_list/regional/Dermochelys_MTSG_Mediterranean_Assessment.pdf but the map indicates there is... this should be changed.

The world's largest population of nesting leatherbacks (in Gabon) only gets a yellow dot on the map... it should be red! Ref: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090517212653.htm 144.173.5.196 (talk) 13:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC) ALan F. Rees University of Exeter, UK

New info

New info http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/01/05/rspb.2010.2467.full Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 02:16, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Picture of ham?

I was wondering why there is a picture of a slice of ham? It doesn't have anything to do with the subject in question...wouldn't a picture of the turtle itself (or even no picture at all) be a little more appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.39.198 (talk) 23:18, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Joke edit reverted, and editor gently spoken to. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Turtle Poo

Only tenmillion out of those eggs survive,and when hatching the turtles poo . What does this mean? c 2007 (UTC) I think it means ten million eggs survive, and while the baby turtles are hatching they poop. Strange.Turtleguy1134 (talk) 23:29, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Turtle diet

It would be nice if someone could add a section on Sea turtle diet page. ok i will.

Would somebody be able to find an uncopyrighted pic of an actual baby leatherback to include on this page? The photo that was on here was NOT a leatherback sea turtle, so I deleted it.

I will get the turtle pic.Turtleguy1134 (talk) 23:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Distribution map error

According to the text of this WP article, Dermochelys coriacea is found in the Pacific Ocean along the coast of California, Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. However, the distribution map shows its range stopping at southern California. Perhaps someone could add a little more blue to the extreme left side of the map to better indicate the correct geographic range of this species.74.109.236.194 (talk) 00:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC) I guess it came from a book. Now we have to find out who is right.Turtleguy1134 (talk) 23:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Dermochelyidae as a new phylum

I know you all say leatherbacks are turtles and reptiles, but in fact that is just a big glitch.Their body temp is higher than the the outside temp. Turtleguy1134 (talk) 23:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't make them a phylum. The issue is with the definition of reptiles, not with whether a turtle is one. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 23:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Hatnote to Lute

Is this hatnote necessary? The Leatherback turtle is sometimes known as the lute turtle, but there is no Wikipedia page with "lute" in the title that will lead you here. A look at Google, although far from definitive, doesn't lead to anything linking to here using the name "lute" for the turtle where the context is not already firmly turtles. Thryduulf (talk) 16:06, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 17:25, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

• I'll have to quick fail this one. Too many missing citations, make sure to sort this out before nominating again. FunkMonk (talk) 17:25, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Life expectancy

Is anything known about life expectancy in this species? or turtles in general? Autochthony wrote: 1433 Z 2012 January 04. 109.154.29.239 (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually not. The speculation is just that, and states 50 years or more. (That's all the data we have. Maybe in another 50 years it will say "100 years or more." ) But the article would be better if it addressed that lack of knowledge. Think I'll add it now. 66.87.0.98 (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Removed videos

I deleted two videos from the Life History (Predation) section as they purported to be of leatherback hatchlings emerging from a nest, and a hatchling running for the sea. In fact neither video was of leatherbacks; they both showed cheloniid hatchlings.Gleedowengleedowen (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Two odd sentences in physiology paragraph

There are two sentences in here that don't make any sense. I edited them, but my edits were reverted, so I figured I'd post them here and someone more legit could take a look.

"high body temperatures using metabolically generated cold" - You can metabolically generate HEAT, but you can't metabolically generate COLD, which is simply the absence of heat. Also, it doesn't make sense that you'd generate high body temperatures by generating cold. Especially given that it goes on to talk about how the turtle keeps warm by swimming and hunting a lot and staying active, it seems that it would be generating heat. This sentence struck me as someone making a sly vandalism edit in the long-past.

"...recorded diving to depths as small as 1,280 metres (4,200 ft)..." - This just struck me as very odd wording. In context, its talking about the deep/large/great depths that the turtle can dive to, but then it uses "small" to describe the turtle's maximum recorded depth.

Anyway, maybe User:Prof._Mc can drop by and explain why he thought my edits were meant to "lighten up" the article. My guess is that it was an automatic anti-vandal response since it was an edit from an IP address and it was only 2 words that changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.0.202.177 (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Size

This article says that leatherbacks are the 4th largest reptile after 3 crocodillians, yet komodo dragons (which are lizards) can be a good 3 feet longer, then there are snakes like anacondas as well which can be six feet longer. I get the impression that its supposed to be the 4th heaviest reptile perhaps? "Largest" is a little vague. 123.243.215.92 (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Leatherback sea turtle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110430102216/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070712/ap_on_sc/malaysia_cloning_turtles_1 to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070712/ap_on_sc/malaysia_cloning_turtles_1
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110430102210/http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070717/sc_afp/malaysiausindonesia_070717180328 to http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070717/sc_afp/malaysiausindonesia_070717180328

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Evaluation

The article has credible sources and provides credible links. Everything in the article seems to be without opinion and relevant to the topic at hand. MadisonKR (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2016 (UTC)