Talk:Grizzly bear
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Map
The range map is wrong. I know for a fact there aren't any Grizzlies in Oraon. It should look more like this. 76.2.28.172 03:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
mmmph. It is pretty terrible. The current range map shows them as extending well into Quebec. Anyone care to redraw it? 65.213.77.129 (talk) 18:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Tone tag
Someone had added the following tag to the section now entitled "Encountering a Grizzly Bear in the wild":
 |
The tone or style of this article or section may not be appropriate for Wikipedia. Specific concerns may be found on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.(December 2007) |
I have Did you delete that section or the safety camping in bear territory? Both sections were well written and highly informative. If they need revision that can be done easily, but they should still be up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.13.169.231 (talk • contribs)
[edit] huh?
At the bottom of the article in the see also area is this phrase - "There has been a discovery of a new breed of grizzly bear known as "the jackaleenes" which are a cross breed between the grizzly bear and the panda." Not only is this in the wrong area of the article, but it is unsourced, not to mention unlikely, as the range of the grizzly bear and the panda are a couple of thousand miles apart. If anyone can verify this fact it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. vanis314 15:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I took care of it. That jackass has done that several times to this article already but he's on a dynamic IP and it doesn't all show in the contribs. I presume it's the same person because the sentence added is the same every time. Anyway, thanks for picking that up. — Dave (Talk | contribs) 17:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Who's the largest?
Witch bear is the largest one? (In weight and hight)
Is it the Polar, Grizzly or the Kodiak bear? Jørgen88 22:47, 11 November 2007 (U
[edit] Teleporting bear nonsense
In three edits the 23rd of February 2008 65.78.121.166 added three separate bits of nonsense vandalism about bears teleporting to attack people. The last bit was subtle enough to be taken as oddly worded but relevant.* I've removed it, and am explaining here lest someone mistake my action for anything else.
- The addition of the sentence "Currentally there is no protection against the appearing grizzleys so any interaction with them will most likely result in death." at the beginning of the section on reintroduction.
Hatchetfish (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] outrunning grizzly bears on downhill slopes
This paragraph was deleted and replaced by a statement that a human just can't outrun a grizzly:
"Another effective escape measure is to run away from the grizzly on a downhill slope. This works effectively because a grizzly bear's front legs are normally only four fifths as long as its hind legs. While this is not true regarding all bears, it is indeed true in the case of grizzlies, and has been proven so by certain Alaskan gaming orginizations. Campers must use caution, however, as most bears in the continental United States are actually brown or black bears, and these bears can indeed run the same speed on any slope. Attempting to outrun a charging bear, except in the aforementoned case, would prove fatally ineffective, as almost all bears are quite capable of outrunning a human."
However, there appears to be a race called Grizzly Downhill or something, so I'm not sure if the information is incorrect or not. If it's a myth, it should be labelled as such and reintroduced to the article --Enric Naval (talk) 11:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
editied the rather funny section to hopefully conform to the standards and thus removed the tag. (Nice one to whoever wrote that, it was pretty funny). Ben 21:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
==Range== hi An interesting side note is that grizzly bears are now being seen more frequently in the high arctic. This apparent "expansion" of range is difficult to explain and has been theorized as being linked to global warming. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grizzlydog (talk • contribs) 15:13, 22 December 2005.
- Can somebody add information on the range of grizzlies? Nothing in the current article mentions their range within North America. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.225.246.225 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 12 January 2006.
- Added a map. -Ikkyu2 17:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
the map says their range stops at the u.s.-mexican border. i really doubt bears respected imaginary lines that weren't even concieved of yet. someone should get a more accurate map to show their true range of habitat. comments Lue3378 10:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- There's a map showing a dip into Mexico in this pdf: [1]. It's Figure 13, on page 56 of 98. --Mathew5000 11:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Capitalization?
Shouldn't this article be located at Grizzly bear? I see no reason that "bear" needs to be capitalized. If I forget to effect this move within three days, bug me on my talk page. --Cyde Weys 22:55, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Well, there's also the Polar Bear page as well. I recall the Wikiproject species group debating this for a long time, and so far, there's no strict consensus, so it can go either way. —Khoikhoi 22:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sub-species question
The Brown bear page still lists the grizzly bear as a separate sub-species, despite the DNA evidence discussed here. At a minimum, there should be conformity between the two pages saying something like, "There appears to be a lack of consensus as to whether the grizzly bear is a separate subspecies of the brown bear, etc." At this point, the two articles are simply in conflict.
NorCalHistory 21:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
- The comprehensive bibliography I compiled on this issue, which took me several hours, was deleted without comment (although much of the article text I contributed remains in the article). Go back in the article history and read it if you're really interested. -ikkyu2 (talk) 06:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Climbing trees
I am particulary concerned by the way this has been phrased in the section. it makes it sounds like that the first thing you should do should you see a grizzley is run and climb up a tree, which isn't the case at all. also the fact that grizzleys can't climb trees is false. A simple google search to yellowstone national parks advice [2] on grizzleys says this isn't the case if the branches are spaced far enough apart. Also the act of running from a bear is likely to increase its anger. While it is still a solution it is not the first one recomended anywhere that I have come across warnings about bears. Philbentley 13:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
This movie (http://www.fws.gov/video/wmv/grizbear512stream.wmv) may be converted into OGG/Theora and added to the article as it is a free work, produced by the US government (like the photo in the taxobox). I'll do this later unless someone else is up for some encoding. —msikma <user_talk:msikma> 12:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Treadwell Trivia
In the trivia section, Treadwell lived among bears in Katmai National Park, not Kodiak. If someone can confirm this, please change.
[edit] Colbert
While I'm a big Colbert fan, I think maybe the comedy is taking away from the legitimacy of the entry.
[edit] Grizzly, Seperate Speicies Than Brown Bear?
Some people think that the grizzly is a 9th speices seperate than than the brown. March 18 2007
every one there is only 15,00 grizzlies left in Canada, there going to get instinked, we got to help them!
[edit] Safety in Hiking
The section discussing the saftey of hiking in bear territory makes repeated use of the word "you" and it reads like a manual or safety pamphlet. Perhaps a bit of cleanup is in order. Rugz 01:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Translation needed
What does this mean: "This causes 9% of human-caused grizzlies, together with other human-related causes"? And this: "The Mexican Grizzly bear is extinctBear Specialist Group 1996. IUCN 2007. 2007 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Retrieved on 2008-04-09.."? JehoshaphatJIJ (talk) 10:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Population data
The population estimate for BC is greatly understated. Despite the stupidity of government at times, they would not anually authorize over 1000 tags if the population was in the 1400 range, even they would not legally condone the harvest of over two-thirds of the quote population. Just refer to the Limited Entry Hunting Synopsis for BC (LEH) and sum the total of available grizzly tags and then consider the additional number retained for hunting guides, the population in BC must be fairly roubust to continually support annual harvest of over 1000 individuals. 208.114.186.208 (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC) PS-If you want people to take you seriously extinction might smell but is not literally spelt with stink and has nothing to do with instinct. what cha up ta cuzin bemis
