Talk:Giant panda

"Pandas" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pandas has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 22 § Pandas until a consensus is reached. Bonoahx (talk) 22:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2023

change intermission to intromission in the Reproduction and Parenting section. 142.113.214.19 (talk) 00:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. "intermission" does not appear at all in the article that I can find. In which sentence do you see it? Cannolis (talk) 00:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Subspecies

3 subspecies are listed, but I can find no reference anywhere to "a.m.hastorni".

Unless someone can point to a valid reference, it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.144.30.52 (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

It looks like that was added by Super Dromaeosaurus with this edit. It's been over five years, but perhaps they can recall where that information was from? —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 15:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

No idea. I probably just copied it from Spanish Wikipedia. The subspecies is listed there too. I am not opposed to its removal. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 16:06, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Looking at es-wiki, Sahaquiel9102 added the subspecies to the infobox with this edit, but I don't see A.m. hastorni) in the text before or after that addition. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:31, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to remove it at this point. es-wiki had a page [for Ailuropoda melanoleuca hastorni that's been deleted three times as vandalism. On en-wiki, this 2017 edit to Ailuropoda removed the mention of A.m. hastorni due to a lack of any sources that didn't seem to trace back to Wikipedia. That same edit shows that the common name being given for that subspecies was "Eastern panda," which doesn't help. zh-wiki gives 云南大熊猫 as the common name, which was added with this edit. That translates to Yunnan giant panda, but the only mentions to a Yunnan panda are connected to a 2015 poaching instance. While that incident showed the pandas to be present in an area where they were previously thought to have been wiped out, there's no indication that they are or were a different subspecies. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 16:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Maybe they should be removed from the other Wikipedias as well. If it's a legit subspecies, someone should restore it eventually anyway. It's not like this kind of things are so obscure. It's likely a hoax. Super Dromaeosaurus (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done Well, I just ran through the full list of sister project articles from the sidebar. Most didn't list subspecies, a lot only had A. m. melanoleuca and A. m. qinlingensis. I removed A. m. hastorni from infoboxes in nine projects (I couldn't remove the tenth instance — zh-wiki, where the page is protected from me editing it). Hopefully the English-language edit comment (or a Google Translate version) will help avoid reverts... I could have missed one or two where the Latin name was rendered in local characters or where the subspeieces information was in a collapsed or otherwise inobvious place. —Carter (Tcr25) (talk) 18:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2023

172.127.157.33 (talk) 17:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC) Panda bears are vurnerable

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. If you mean to note their conservation status as a vulnerable species, that is already covered in the article.  BelowTheSun  (T•C) 17:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023

Change US$1.5 billion to US $1.5 billion 172.127.157.33 (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

change it pls it makes no sense Skmdasdadasdk (talk) 17:24, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: this is the correct format. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:41, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023

change Predators. Although adult giant pandas have few natural predators other than humans, young cubs are vulnerable to attacks by snow leopards, yellow-throated martens, eagles, feral dogs, and the Asian black bear. to Predators. Although adult giant pandas have few natural predators other than humans, young cubs are vulnerable to attacks by snow leopards, yellow-throated martens, eagles, feral dogs, and the Asian black bear. Sub-adults weighing up to 50 kg (110 lb) may be vulnerable to predation by leopards. Skmdasdadasdk (talk) 17:23, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. UtherSRG (talk) 17:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2023

change giant panda

to panda bear 172.127.157.33 (talk) 16:35, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. UtherSRG (talk) 16:44, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

The closest word for Panda is the Nepali word "Panja" and not "Ponya".

Hi, I have already tried editing the word "Ponya" to the correct term "Panja" multiple times, only to have it reverted by the editors. I am extremely sorry if I do not know how to properly cite the source. I want to do my best to get this information corrected as the word "ponya" does not exist in the Nepali language. The closest word is "Ponja", which is just an incorrect way of spelling "Panja".

Panja refers to claws, palm or fang. The word "panja" is also used in the Hindi language.

I do not know how to make the proper edit. If any editor is reading this, can you please edit the word "ponya" to "panja" and cite the source necessary?

Some sources are:

https://dictionary.nepaliexpert.com/search/term/panjA

https://www.shabdkosh.com/search-dictionary?lc=hi&sl=en&tl=hi&e=%E0%A4%AA%E0%A4%82%E0%A4%9C%E0%A4%BE FateXBlood (talk) 13:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

The source you provided is not reliable. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 14:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

See Red panda#Etymology and respective reliable sources therein. BhagyaMani (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2024 (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:Giant panda/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Wolverine XI (talk · contribs) 16:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 06:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I should have a review written for this in about a week or so. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:55, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Your time is always appreciated. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 15:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: You free? Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 16:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

I've looked at the sources and I'm working my way through the prose. I should have it all posted today or tomorrow. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

OK. I'll just wait. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 14:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Wolverine XI I've posted the review below. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien: I've addressed every comment. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 18:38, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Well-written

General:

• "However" can almost always be removed without changing the meaning of the sentence.

Taxonomy:

• The closest candidate is the Nepali word ponya – Can we get a translation for ponya?
  • Already mentioned as panda

Distribution:

• Successful habitat preservation have seen – Is this grammatically correct?
  • Fixed
• to the panda's avoidance of competition – What type of competition? For specific food sources?
  • Fixed
• it was estimated that the range of the giant panda had declined to about 99% of its range in earlier millenniums – Is this supposed to say by about 99%? If I'm reading it correctly, then to about 99% would be hardly any change at all.
  • Fixed

Description:

• when viewed from a distance, the panda displays disruptive coloration while close up, they rely more on blending in – This needs to be restructured. The comma placement makes it unclear what's referring to what.
  • Fixed
• has a "thumb" and five fingers; the "thumb" – Avoid scare quotes. If it's not a thumb, then it shouldn't be called one. Maybe "similar to a thumb" or something like that.
  • Fixed

Ecology:

• The diet section jumps back and forth. For one example, the cyanide info starts in the first paragraph. Then it appears again in the third paragraph, before the third paragraph abruptly changes topic. Different aspects should be grouped into their own paragraphs.
  • Rearranged
• consisting almost exclusively of bamboo (around 99%) – This would be cleaner if the parenthetical were removed so it reads something like "with approximately 99% of its diet consisting of bamboo".
  • Fixed
• Similarly, the giant panda's round face – It's not really "similar", it's still discussing the same aspect.
  • Fixed
• such as Fargesia dracocephala and Fargesia rufa. – Are these the two of the most common? If so, it should say so. If not, there's no need to name them specifically.
  • Done

Behavior:

• Though the panda is often assumed to be docile, it has been known to attack humans – This needs more context. It could be read in any way from "it's incredibly rare and even then only toward children" to "contrary to popular belief, pandas frequently attack humans on sight".
  • Done
• The article states the role of the anogenital gland three times in as many sentences.
  • Fixed
• A pandas size can be conveyed through the height of the scent mark – Apostrophe
  • Added
• Reproduction should start with the general information about panda reproduction before introducing the aspects that are involved with pandas in captivity.
  • Done
• to try extreme methods – Avoid editorializing.
  • Fixed
• Only recently – When is "recently"?
  • Added
• Redundancy: The normal reproductive rate is considered to be one young every two years and The interval between births in the wild is generally two years.
  • Rm first one
• It is expected that zoos in destinations such as San Diego in the United States and Mexico City will now be able to – When is "now"?
  • Specified

Human interaction:

• In the past, pandas were thought to be rare and noble creatures – When, and by whom?
  • Fixed
• The West first learned of the giant panda – Who is "The West"? Are we just talking about Western Europe?
  • Rm section per below
• which costs five times more than keeping the next most expensive animal – It's unclear whether this includes the loaning fee.
  • Rm section per below
• There's a lot of overlap between the sections about zoos and panda diplomacy
  • Combined

Conservation:

• This whole section feels more like a timeline of facts instead of an overview of panda conservation.
  • Rearranged things
• Its range is currently confined to a small portion on the western edge of its historical range – "Currently" should be put in context. How long has it been like this?
  • Source doesn't specify
• scientists believe the wild population may be as large as 3,000 – This is in present tense, but the article was describing 2006.
  • Fixed
• As the species has been reclassified to "vulnerable" since 2016 – Reclassified from what?
  • Added

Verifiable with no original research

• All of the sources are reliable and sufficient for GA. With that said, the sourcing leaves something to be desired. Most of the sources seem to be hand-picked for individual facts. Large topics like this benefit from overview sources, especially books, that support facts across the article. This makes sure that all of the main details are covered and that they're proportional to how they appear in those sources. Right now, a lot of weight is given to individual studies or opinions when the article should really be based on widely accepted aspects that are covered in general academic sources about pandas. The sourcing meets good article standards, but it would need some work before this could be considered for featured article candidacy.
• The subspecies descriptions are not fully sourced.
  • Fixed
  • Dropping in here: I'd say some of the sourcing is pretty subpar, especially the EB cites, a couple cites to generalist papers with "a study has found"-type articles (these frequently manage to misquote or misattribute the study, the original paper is much better as a ref), and some very old sources sources from the 80s-90s (not that these are necessarily bad, but they may have been been made inaccurate by more recent studies). AryKun (talk) 03:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
    • Actioned. Replaced some refs.

Spot checks:

• [19] Science Daily (2012) – Good.
• [25] Zhang et al (2018) – Good.
• [44] Christiansen & Wroe (2007) – Good.
• [53] McKenzie (2022) – Some close paraphrasing: The article says get through the nutrient-scarce period from late August to April, when they feed mostly on bamboo leaves and the source says survive the nutrient-scarce period from late August to April, where only bamboo leaves are available to eat.
  • Rephrased accordingly
• [77] Smith Bailey (2004) – Good.
• [105] Chen et al (2002) – Good.

Broad in its coverage

Major aspects:

• Outside of a very brief description of predation on young pandas, there's virtually no information about interspecies behavior/interactions.
  • Added information
    • You should also probably elaborate more on vocalizations. LittleJerry (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

      Like with this LittleJerry (talk) 20:38, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

      Added. Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 06:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Minor details:

• (hence it is always boiled when used for human consumption) – Not relevant to pandas.
  • Removed
• For six years, scientists studied six pandas tagged with GPS collars at the Foping Reserve in the Qinling Mountains. They took note of their foraging and mating habits and analyzed samples of their food and feces. The pandas would move from the valleys into the Qinling Mountains and would only return to the valleys in autumn. – Is this one study of pandas worth highlighting over all of the others? The article already says they move between environments, so saying there was a study about it doesn't really add much.
  • Removed
• A seven-year-old female named Jin Yi – This one panda's death isn't significant enough for inclusion. The article should cover what's generally known to affect pandas, not specific instances.
  • Removed
• The cub was born at 07:41 on 23 July that year in Sichuan as the third cub of You You, an 11-year-old. – Another specific panda as opposed to general info.
  • Removed
• In August 2014, a rare birth of panda triplets was announced in China; it was the fourth of such births ever reported. – Another specific birth.
  • Removed
• The article doesn't need to go into detail about the Zouyu based on one person's speculation. I suggest shrinking this down to one sentence.
  • Done
• The article covers seemingly random interactions between pandas and westerners. Besides knowledge of the animal, it's not clear whether any of this is relevant.
  • Removed

Neutral

• There's a lot of "may", "might", and "appears to" in this article. Without additional context, the reader doesn't know where these ideas come from or how widely accepted they are.
  • Tackled
• Chris Packham's opinions on conservation are given undue weight. Just because one person believes something doesn't mean it should be in the article.
  • Removed

Stable

No recent disputes.

Illustrated

All images are licensed and captioned. The only change that needs to be made is that the caption "feeding panda" is vague. Maybe "A panda feeding on bamboo"?

• • Done

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

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 02:21, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the distinctive coloration of the giant panda appears to serve as camouflage in both winter and summer?

• Source: https://academic.oup.com/beheco/article/28/3/657/3058530

• Reviewed:

Created by Wolverine XI (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Wolverine XI ^{(talk to me)} 10:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Earwig shows a very high score for some sites, but they seem to be WP mirrors. Everything else is fine. AryKun (talk) 11:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@Wolverine XI and AryKun: The article was created in 2001 so created was not correct for the nomination. It is GA. I think the 90% Earwig appears to be a site that copied Wikipedia. Bruxton (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

I didn't notice that it was nominated for creation; I'd been following the GA review so I assumed that it had been nominated for that. AryKun (talk) 07:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2024

The below is to make the wording a little better and reduce run on

Change

“The shoot is an important energy source, as it contains starch and is 32% protein, hence pandas evolved the ability to effectively digest starch.”

To

“Pandas evolved the ability to effectively digest starch, making the shoot an important energy source. Though mostly starch, bamboo shoots are 32% protein, and therefore a good substitute for a carnivorous diet.”

Or something like that. LPantalons (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done UtherSRG (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Is there a source for bamboo shoots being 32% protein? Seems more likely to be 3.2%. Derryp (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2024

the Canine Distemper Virus (CDV) can cause severe symptoms, including fever and respiratory failure, and is highly contagious, posing a severe risk when introduced into panda populations. Leptospirosis, another infectious threat, is a bacterial infection that causes symptoms like fever, jaundice, and kidney damage. Parasitic infections, such as Baylisascaris roundworms, can lead to malnutrition and secondary infections. Pandas in captivity are more vulnerable to infectious diseases due to the close quarters, potentially introducing pathogens and increasing stress levels, further weakening their immune systems. 96.235.160.113 (talk) 05:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)