# Talk:Oribi

Conflicting source information about social structures and territory marking and defence, needs more research. Perhaps someone better informed  can help? - Rooivalk 12:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Oribi/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 18:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Will review this now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Very sound and solid work. I hope you will find my comments helpful. I also did some edits directly in the article, please feel free to revert if needed.

Many thanks for the review (awesome nitpicking!) and your good edits :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:00, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


### Comments
and the body is so modified to accommodate such a large number of them – this needs additional information. In what way is the body modified?
Added an example.
An important feature of the social behaviour of oribi is the "dung ceremony", in which all animals form temporary dung middens. – This also needs additional information. For what are the dung middens for?
Not clear, it seems it is just an important social feature.
Oribi at least three months old stand erect and give out one to three alarm whistles on sensing danger; this behaviour is more common in adults than in juveniles and in males than in females. – there seems to be more then one problem in this sentence, I don't really understand it.
Rephrased to "Oribi at least three months old have been observed giving out one to three alarm whistles on sensing danger. These whistles are more common in adults than in juveniles, and males appear to whistle more."
this leads to greater vigilance and is an effective anti-predator measure – this reads like "which other sympatric antelopes around, the oribi will be more attentive". I don't think that is what you want to say?
I tried rephrasing it to "this leads to greater vigilance among herds". What I want to say is that when those other antelopes are around, chances are greater that predators will be detected better ("greater vigilance") and thus is an anti-predator measure for all of them.
I still have questions here: Oribi are often sympatric with larger grazers such as the African buffalo, hippopotamus, hartebeest, Thomson's gazelle and topi; this leads to greater vigilance among herds and is an effective anti-predator measure.[3][20] Does this mean that these species form mixed herds, or that their herds tend to move together? Sympatricity only means that they share the same area. As it is, the sentence implies that sympatricity is an anti-predator measure. I think the greater vigilance is only a side effect of sympatricity, and that sympatricity is not a "measure". Will it work to make two separate sentences out of this?
Firstly, thanks for promoting this. About this line, how would this sound? "Herds of oribi are often sympatric with herds of larger grazers such as the... topi. The combined vigilance of these herds is an effective anti-predator measure." Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome, and thank you for this great work! Regarding your suggestion: this is imo still not entirely correct. Herds can't be sympatric, only biological taxa can. This is not was sympatricity is about. We should not use this word in this context. What does the source say exactly? I still do not understand what the "measure" really is – do the separate species tend to graze together in order to increase vigilance? If not, we should not write "measure", and perhaps would be better off with something like this: "Oribi are in many regions sympatric with […], which allows for a faster detection of predators." Not sure, what do you think? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
These species are sympatric in some parts of their ranges, and the source says "oribi occur in close association with". So the trouble is with the use of sympatric for herds, I must have misunderstood the term. If you think it is proper now, I will take your wording. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I understand. What about: "The oribi's range overlaps with those of larger grazers such as […]; these separate species often occur in close proximity to each other, increasing predator vigilance." --Jens Lallensack (talk) 18:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, done. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


### Minor comments
Typically diurnal, the oribi is active mainly during the day – this is a tautology. Consider writing "The oribi is diurnal (active during the day)" or something similar.
Rephrased to "The oribi is diurnal (active mainly during the day), though some activity may also be observed at night."
The oribi occurs in a number of protected areas throughout its range. – This information in the lead does not really say anything. How could the oribi not occur in some protected areas with such a large range?
Removed from lead.
Females have four teats. – A bit of additional information can be very helpful for the reader here: Is this what can be expected in antelopes, or is this something unusual?
Nothing unusual, had it been I would have mentioned it.
Common predators include jackals and smaller carnivores. – Well, Jackals are carnivores as well. Smaller carnivores? But they cannot be so small? Perhaps it would be better to give some examples.
Changed to "carnivores such as jackals".
the steep fall of 92% in oribi populations – please choose if you prefer to write "%" or "percent", and do it consistently in the article.
Fixed, changed to %
Would be nice to have some more information on the subspecies: 1) Are (where) some of them sometimes treated as separate species? 2) How to distinguish them? 3) Are any of them endangered (I think the Somalian one is)? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:35, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Added on taxonomy [1] and differences [2]. That's all I could find. About point 3, I have no sourced info on that. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:13, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the fast fixes, will have a closer look later! For now, I only want to provide some links concerning the last point: [3] and [4] is about an endangered and an extinct subspecies, while the main entry [5] also contains some very good information that could be added, such as the estimated pupulation number. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:48, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I thought I had included all that. Fixed now. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok great, thanks :) One little thing left (see comment above), but will pass it now nevertheless. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2016 (UTC)