Talk:Leopard

new lead img

I propose this. It's just too magnificent. File:Leopard africa.jpg -- Some1 ^{talk} 19:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I object because this was lead img for a long time until early July 2021 when we decided to change to the present one. See discussion in July 2021 above. BhagyaMani (talk) 23:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I concur. The discussion from July 2021 should stand. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:26, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Re ..should stand : at least for now and some more time, but surely not indefinitely. I don't object to changing the lead img per se, but am in favour of using a NEW one instead of reinstating one that already was displayed in the box for a long time. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

@BhagyaMani well said! UtherSRG (talk) 11:52, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Suggestions for Improvement, cont

(Copy-pasted some old notes of mine, since this is up for GA review) Major concerns:

• The Distribution and Behaviour & ecology sections seem to focus a bit heavily on leopard by national park/similar, and the Distribution section could probably use some better organization (maybe split into Africa and Asia subsections?).
  • This doesn't seem so bad anymore, but there's still a bit more focus on the parks and not as much on the actual habitats in the 4th paragraph.
• Create an "Interactions with humans" section, with "In captivity" and "Man-eating" subsections.
  • This has been rectified. I'd like the sentence about Bringing Up Baby to be expanded to explain why that movie in particular is important.

Minor concerns:

• Possibly restructure the Behavior subsections: "Enemies and competitors" seems not quite encyclopedic in tone. Maybe add a "Communication" or "Health" subsections?
  • These concerns stand.

Possibly expand:

• Most of the sections could some expansion, but Threats and Culture could use the most work.

Dancing_Dollar, you want to take a look at these? No pressure. SilverTiger12 (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Leopard/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 13:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I'll have a go at this one. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments

The article is well-structured with headings much as expected.

• I suggest "Conservation issues" be moved from being chapter 6. to being section 6.1, i.e. placing it inside "Human interaction", as poaching and countermeasures are certainly human activities. Done

• I see that British English spellings like "colour" and "centre" have recently been changed to American spellings (though "Variant colouration" remains). This is contrary to policy, as wide consensus is required for any such change. They need to be put back throughout, please.

• In "Etymology", please change "referred to" to "meant"; remove the words "which refers to"; and change "that were used" to "to be used". Done

• In "Size", most or all of the Imperial measurements in the {{convert}} templates offer spurious precision beyond the simple round numbers of the metric measurements. For instance, 20 cm should be 8 in, not 7.9; 45 kg should be 99 lb (if not "about 100", indeed), not 99.2. Skull breadth measured to 7.125 in (to the nearest 1/200 of an inch, really?) is a specially egregious example (indeed, a WikiHorrors museum specimen). Please reduce the specified precision for all the templates.

Ah, all the skull measurements have Imperial before Metric, which is inconsistent (and non-standard). Sorry for the trouble but they need to be switched to have Metric first (there are different ways of doing this). Done

• In "Evolution", please spell out "nDNA" as "nuclear DNA" and similarly "mtDNA" as "mitochondrial DNA" at first instance. Done

• The "two cladograms" are excessively small, and I've no idea why we'd format these as an SVG image rather than using the normal {{clade}} template. I guess we can live with the SVG for the moment, so please insert "|upright=2" after "|thumb" to make the text labels about as big as normal text (which is the requirement). Done

• I kind of see why the "Rock art" image from Chauvet cave has appeared up here, but rock art belongs in "Human interactions" at the end of the article, so please move it down there. Done

• Same goes for the "Magerius Mosaic" image in "Distribution and habitat", it belongs in the Human section. That would be the right place even if the image were mentioned in the text, which it isn't.  Done

• In "Characteristics", I see precisely no function to the sentence "The chromosomes include four acrocentric, five metacentric, seven submetacentric and two telocentric pairs.[27]", so please remove it and merge the previous sentence to the previous paragraph. Done

• In "Variant colouration", "pink panther" is not supported by the cited source, so please remove it. (The source does support "strawberry", so that bit is fine.)

• In "Variant colouration", suggest you gloss "Kra Isthmus" with "in Thailand" as the text jumps about between continents. Done

• Actually the "Variant colouration" section is full of WP:UNDUE detail compared to the rest of the article. It reads as if a teenage editor had got rather over-excited about black panthers (ho, ho!) and pink panthers (giggle!!), and very excited indeed about finding big black cats here, there, and everywhere in the style of "Video shows 'big cat' creature that could be young panther spotted in Derbyshire field" (breathless gasp!!!). This is unencyclopedic. I think all we need is a very short paragraph at the end of "Characteristics" with a link to Black panther#Leopard; since we have a subsidiary article on that topic, we don't have to repeat it all here, so please condense the material down to a brief mention, keeping (most of) the existing citations. Done

• In "Hunting and diet", the Multiple Image needs to be arranged horizontally not vertically as the images run into the next section. Suggest you use "|direction=horizontal |align=center" in place of the existing settings. Done

• You will probably need to arrange images horizontally, using Multiple Image or a Gallery, in "Human interaction". Done

• Images all seem to be properly licensed on Commons.

• Spot-checks on citations are all ok.

Summary

This is mainly a well-organised and properly-cited article, with a few small defects as listed above. I hope to see it reach GA status very shortly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

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.

Did you know nomination

{{Did you know nominations/Leopard}}

Leopard in Israel

A new editor to this page repeatedly added that the leopard may still exits in Israel referencing newspaper articles. This addition was placed into the section on taxonomy, where this statement is irrelevant. Re its presence in that country, see the respective IUCN Red List of 2019, where is clearly stated: In 2006, Leopard populations were estimated at eight individuals in Israel's Judean Desert .., however, they have not been confirmed since. If any leopard has been recorded later than 2018 in that country, then this should be properly referenced using a scientific source, but NOT a newspaper article that contains merely speculations. – BhagyaMani (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi user:BhagyaMani, I've addressed all your comments and you reverted my changes twice and did an additional change that reverted the reference to Israel. AGF, you could have alerted the text to match your decision on how to represent the "distribution" of Arabian leopards in Israel. IUCN listed it as "Possibly Extinct" in Israel and it is a valid term. How do you suggest to clarify the subspecies status in Israel? Should I add the year of IUCN decision?

The reference to a newspaper article shows a wild leopard in Israel in 2007, I think it is significant, are you rejecting this source? RanR (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

The 2007 sighting is already referenced in the respective page on the Arabian leopard. Again: details on distribution and regional extinction are irrelevant in a section on taxonomy, so are newspaper articles. – BhagyaMani (talk) 19:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

1. Distribution - This is a "distribution" column, how can you say that "details on distribution ... are irrelevant"? All other subspecies have details on distribution.

2. Regional extinction - You kept "locally extinct in the Sinai Peninsula and Jordan" so you contradict yourself about "details on ... regional extinction are irrelevant". Furthermore, for the "Amur leopard" there is also detail on regional extinction ("It is native to the Russian Far East and northern China, but is locally extinct in the Korean peninsula")

I've also seen your edit in List_of_mammals_of_Israel [1], so I don't understand if you are rejecting that Arabian Leopards were present in Israel RanR (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

user:BhagyaMani I agree with the part of your last edit adding regional extinction in Israel.

However, you added Size details in a Taxonomy list Distribution column, which I find much more irrelevant than my changes which you reverted. Please fix it or tell me if it's ok that I'll fix it.

I encourage you to follow WP:DNB for other new editors in this page, and WP:CIV.

I'm also going to add WP:3RR in your user talk for future references.

Thank you. RanR (talk) 14:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for managing to talk this out instead of continuing to fight. My thoughts: RanR, re: size in the taxonomy section- that the Arabian leopard is the smallest subspecies is considered acceptable to state as a general fact (exact measurements would not be). Re: distribution in Israel- BhagyaMani, it isn't unreasonable to state that the Arabian leopard is considered possibly extinct in Israel, but RanR, a better (and more recent) source than a newspaper would be preferable. Happy editing, SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment. Re distribution : I checked but did not find any more recent scientific article on leopard in southern Israel than the references in the 2019 IUCN Red List account; hence no confirmed record between 2006 and 2019. The only more recent one is about archaeological hunting records of large predators in the southern Levant. And I still think we should avoid references to newspapers, the more so as this page has GA status. Happy editing to you too. – BhagyaMani (talk) 20:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you [user: SilverTiger12]!

I wish I had more recent details on it in Israel, but the last confirmed sighting in the wild was in 2007. I just didn't understand why not noting Israel part at all.

Re Size it is indeed true, but I still think it make it now the exception in the list, surly not to start with this fact in a Distribution column. Your call. RanR (talk) 14:25, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

The weight record of an African leopard was 112 kg not 96 kg according to a Quora document about African leopards

An African leopard was shot in the Angolan rain forest on a scale it weighted 112 kg or 246 pounds: https://www.quora.com/Can-a-Boerboel-kill-a-leopard-since-it-s-bigger/answer/Andres-1057?ch=18&oid=268347885&share=804f4402&srid=ukZgd&target_type=answer

2A02:8440:3417:7C9A:0:56:C2F3:D501 (talk) 21:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)