Talk:Bilby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mammals
Mammals Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Mammal-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Monotremes and Marsupials. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments
Flag
Portal
 Bilby is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota.
Assessment comments

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bilby article.
Article policies

[edit] unsigned items

The reintroduction of this species at the Arid Recovery Reserve in South Australia has been so successful, that all niches within the reserve appear to have been filled.

And can we get a picture up?

[edit] status

I think the bilby's conservation status should be included in this article as it is in many other articles for other australian marsupials. Wikipedia should play an important role in informing the world about the plight of so many Australian animals in a country that has the means but not the will to modernise it's economy and tend away from unsustainable agriculture in recently deforested tracts of land. Australia is the 224th most densely, or 6th least densely populated country in the world, that it should have so many animals on the path to extinction is atrocious. 220.238.151.140 00:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

You are looking at the wrong article. this article is about the genus. Click on the species article and you'll see the conservation status. - UtherSRG (talk) 01:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] species

UtherSRG, in reverting my addition of subspecies you wrote "revert - there are no subspecies of eitehr bilby, according to MSW3.... they are only synonyms.)" I'm not sure how reliable MSW3 is as a source - certainly several print sources differ with this opinion. While I realize there is some controversy regarding some of the subspecies, others are documented as legitimate (ie: m. lagotis grandis). While I can understand how the "lumpers" have seen fit to dispense with extinct subspecies (not uncommon), the status of the two extant subspecies is reflected in many sources. I could try to check sources (ie: Seebeck), but maybe it's just easier to leave this detailed information out of Wikipedia. User:Ian T 17:08, 15 Oct 2007 (UTC)

MSW3 (Mammal Species of the World, 3rd ed 2005), is the canonical taxonomy of mammals. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
While it's US based, the board does include Australians. Subspecies definition is an inherently difficult and controversial area. For example, in MSW3, the currently recognised subspecies of Koala are listed as "Synonyms", whereas the extinct and extant subspecies of Numbat are listed as "Subspecies", so possibly it's a problem of definition in this work. There can never be a "canonical taxonomy of mammals" though the MSW3 does appear a good general source. As far as the surviving bilby subspecies go, they are still referenced as such in textbooks (though Seebeck's "Bilbies & Bandicoots" and the Australian Museum's "Complete Book of Australian Mammals" list all subspecies, neither are current). The Queensland and Northern Territory/Western Australian subspecies do exhibit some physical differences. It bears further investigation (as do the Koala and Numbat). User:Ian T 10:24, 16 Oct 1007 (UTC)