Talk:Porbeagle

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured articlePorbeagle is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 28, 2012.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 26, 2010Good article nomineeListed
April 14, 2010Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 16, 2010.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the porbeagle (pictured) has been known to "play" with kelp fronds, pieces of wood, and fishing floats?
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject iconSharks Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sharks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sharks 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.SharksWikipedia:WikiProject SharksTemplate:WikiProject Sharksshark articles
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Denominations"

Before I delete it out of hand, what purpose does the section giving the shark's name in a zillion other languages? Additionally, I can't help but notice that a number of them seem to be completely fictitious. The Spanish list, for example, includes such charming entries as Taulò, Marrajo, Marraco, Marraquet, Marraix, Ludia, and Caldeon. Now, as any schoolchild can tell you, Spanish doesn't use accents grave, nor does it have an especially large number of words ending with either "t" or "x" ... "Caldeon" looks a bit more plausible, but in light of the appearance of the accent grave in "Taulò", it looks me suspicious, because if such care was taken to make ò, I'm at a loss to figure out why it says "Caldeon" instead of "Caldeón"... The list of French names contains a number of similarly suspicious names. ... ? Tomertalk 23:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted it out of hand - these lists are mostly redundant to the other wikipedia links or are OR magnets. The oceanic whitetip shark had a similar list which turned out to be mostly fiction. I suspect some of the Spanish names are actually names in other languages used in Spain (Catalan,Basque,Gallego), but since they are unsourced and this is English Wikipedia I've struck them all. Yomanganitalk 00:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anagram

It's an anagram of "Bargepole". Somehow I'd like to sneak this in to the article, unfortunately there's no WP entry for "bargepole".

Best wishes SimonTrew (talk) 13:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This anagram is noted in Wiktionary, which is the better place for anagrams, IMHO. ChrisJBenson (talk) 22:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

I am "pretty sure" that the etymology of porbeagle is directly from the Cornish language (NOT a Cornish dialect of English). "por" means "fish", and "beagle (bug[h]el)" means shepherd, so it is literally "fish shepherd" in Cornish. ChrisJBenson (talk) 07:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but por does *not* mean fish in Cornish. The Cornish word for fish was pysk which was pronounced pesk in later stages of the language. Por may be derived from porth (pronounced without the -th in Late Cornish) meaning "harbour". C.f. any Cornish dictionary for that, e.g. Ken George's Gerlyver Meur (2009) or Nicholas Williams' Gerlyver Sawsnek-Kernowek (2000). pokorny 17:25, 10 April 2011 (CET) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.33.55.61 (talk)

The text states that none of the Cornish elements of the name are "fully satisfactory". What does that actually mean? The term 'harbour shepherd' seems 'satisfactory' to my understanding of how the shark may have been seen by fishermen. P:lease could you explain the usage of 'satisfactory' here and how it is judged. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.196.107 (talk) 06:34, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

What a grim set of photos - not a single live, free animal. Instread of dead, hooked or dissected porbeagles, can we please have some of live animals enjoying their natural habitat. 86.147.162.38 (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


IUCN criteria

Is there a way to show the IUCN classification of each subpopulation in the taxo box? It seems to be relevant that some sub-populations are critically endangered. Hectorguinness (talk) 18:43, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 15:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reading the article now... Ucucha 15:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Etymology. The OED gives a more nuanced account of its etymology, which is probably more accurate. I can e-mail you the piece if you like.
That'd be helpful. Thanks.
Can you provide the full citation for the passage? -- Yzx (talk) 21:47, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Something like this:
  • "porbeagle". Oxford English Dictionary (subscription required). Oxford University Press, draft revision June 2008. Retrieved February 25, 2010.
Ucucha 21:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info added; I've preserved the two existing proposed etymologies as they're the most common ones I've encountered, even if inaccurate. -- Yzx (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is the age of the Chilean fossils (in connection with the colonization of the Southern Hemisphere)?
Split up the sites by their ages; the age of the Chilean fossils may be consistent with the ice age colonization theory, but the paleobiogeography of this genus is not yet concretely understood
  • "In the eastern North Pacific," - they are not supposed to be there, are they?
Fixed
  • "The porbeagle may attain a length of 3.7 m (12 ft), though this is uncertain and a more typical length is 2.5 m (8.2 ft)." - perhaps expand a little on what the doubtful 3.7 m record is based on.
Added a bit; size records, particularly older ones, for both Lamna species tend to suffer from misidentifications
  • "The dissected reproductive system of an adult male shark, with parts labeled|The dissected reproductive system of an adult female shark, with parts labeled" (alt text). This is not adequate alt text; it should describe the images rather than merely duplicate the caption (alt text is not a GA criterion, but if you include it, you'd as well make it as good as possible).
Expanded

Ucucha 16:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know of further issues. -- Yzx (talk) 21:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As in the previous article of yours I reviewed, there may be a few issues with unexplained jargon. Perhaps you can have a look through the article, and otherwise I'll list some. Ucucha 21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added some parenthetical terms. -- Yzx (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Couple more unexplained terms in lead: peduncle, aplacental viviparous, oophagous (unexplained technical terms should be avoided especially in the lead, as it serves as a general introduction). Elsewhere: parturition.
Rephrased some
  • "The porbeagle has four rete mirabile systems: the orbital retia accessing its brain and eyes, the lateral cutaneous retia accessing its swimming muscles, the suprahepatic rete accessing its viscera, and the kidney rete." - that sounds like there are five, not four.
How so?
One to the brain and eyes, one to the viscera, one to the kidney, at least two lateral ones. Ucucha 22:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In the sources I've read, the lateral retia has been considered a single system although they're paired, maybe because they're the same type. I can remove the number. -- Yzx (talk) 22:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that might be the explanation, but think the current text is clearer anyway. Ucucha 22:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The porbeagle's capacity for elevating body temperature is second only to the salmon shark's." - among sharks or among endothermic animals as a whole?
Clarified

Ucucha 21:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will now pass the article as a good article. The article seems very comprehensive and generally good; you should consider taking it to featured article candidates. Ucucha 22:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Yzx (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of the best articles on wikipedia?

This should be one of the best articles on wikipedia and this article doesn't even contain a picture of the animal it describes in its natural habitat, thats really poor.. --David-bel (talk) 20:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find one under a suitable free license, by all means contribute it. -- Yzx (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Size?

This is a very comprehensive wiki entry, but there's still room for improvements.

The article states – ” Newborn porbeagles measure 58–67 cm (23–26 in) long and do not exceed 5 kg (11 lb)”, and the reference is a study of the smaller South Pacific porbeagle. The porbeagle in the North Atlantic is definitely bigger than five kilos at birth. For example, the old record porbeagle had near-term embryos, and according to http://www.glaucus.org.uk/Porbeagle-RL.htm “Des Bougourd's shark contained four near-term embryos weighing 16 1/2 lbs, 15 1/4 lbs, 14 3/4 lbs and 14 1/4 lbs - weighing collectively 60 3/4 lbs”

The maximum “record” weight stated is only the record for sports fishing, not the biggest porbeagle over all. There are at least two 600lbs porbeagles caught in recent times. One had a weight of 278 kg, and was mentioned in the study “Analysis of stomach contents of the porbeagle shark (Lamna nasus Bonnaterre) in the northwest Atlantic”, which is already used as a source here (number 22). I don't know what the biggest porbeagle is, but the max size is at least 600 pounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.53.55.22 (talk) 06:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Porbeagle. 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}}).

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 10:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Porbeagle. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:45, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

orbital retia mirabilia assertion is at odds with thermodynamics and not supported by reference.

The claim that the orbital retia mirabilia warm the eyes and brain by 3.6 degrees is not what the reference says and is not consistent with how a heat exchanger works thermodynamically. The reference notes that the eyes and brain of sharks without retia mirabilia have eye temperatures within 0.1 of surrounding while those with have temps up to 3.6 degrees above surrounding. However, the orbital retia mirabilia would serve to conserve heat, reducing heat transfer to the eyes leading to eye temps close to the surrounding that without. retia mirabilia more generally do conserve core temp and allow a heat source by with eyes and brain can receive heat, but it is that core temp and the retia mirabilia on whole and not the specific orbital retia mirabilia that cause the warmer eyes and brain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100D:B11E:CACD:7C53:AEBF:6856:2B74 (talk) 06:50, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Porbeagle"