Talk:Caprinae

message: When I typed in "mountain goat," it came to this page.  While that is not necessarily wrong, I think that, since the name "mountain goat" tends to refer specifically to the Rocky Mountain Goat, I think it would be preferable to redirect "mountain goat" to that page. -- Funnyhat 19:28, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'm switching the redirect so it points there. --Angr/ 19:44, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Mountain goat

message: There ought to be an explanation and reference for this. The genus Pantholops is usually spelled with an o and placed in the subfamily Antilopinae. Who spells it with an a and who proposes to move it to its own subfamily? Gdr 19:54, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Panthalopinae 

message: Both images on the page are of the same species, namely, the Barbary Sheep, and look rather similar. Since this page refers to a group, I've replaced the second image with one of a different species within that group. Anaxial (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Is there a reference for the term "goat antelope"?  I find it confusing as two words.  Is it widely established elsewhere? I'd never heard it, and most Google hits seem to be Wikipedia itself (or derivatives) – technical papers seem to use "caprid" instead. It seems to me that it would be clearer to use it hyphenated: "goat-antelope".  To me this makes it more obvious that we are talking about a single group of animals, without the risk of confusion with either goats as such, or antelopes proper.  This particularly applies in sentences with other names in them, where you end up having to puzzle out a series of apparently equal animal names: "the Rocky Mountain goat is a goat antelope", "the Barbary sheep is a goat antelope", "the Tibetan antelope is not a goat antelope", "the family Bovidae includes goat antelopes, antelopes and cattle".  To anyone unfamiliar with the term, the eye reads along as far as the "goat" – but then the loose "antelope" has to be explained.  (Is it meant to be there, or is it an editing mistake?)  I think the hyphen would make each of these examples clearer, making it obvious that the term is a compound noun – and it would also be more in keeping with normal English usage.--Richard New Forest (talk) 11:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No comments for over a month, so I have made the change. I've also changed redirect pages, but not the dozens of other links.  Is there a bot we can use for that?  --Richard New Forest (talk) 17:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

text: Didn't see this earlier, for whatever reason. Anyway, a quick check reveals that, of the two mammal encyclopaedias I have copies of, one uses the hyphen, and the other does not. So there's at least some debate on the matter.Anaxial (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the term goat antelope is wrong for this article. The Caprinae consist of sheep, goats, goat antelopes, and musk oxen.--Altaileopard (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Goat-antelope

message: Hi. I'm curious to find out if the Shapi is in fact a real creature and not simply some cryptozoological legend? I've searched the net for any information upon it and can find VERY little, not even a scientific classification on it. In fact nearly all search engine hits I've run across are a sentence or two blurb that's been copied almost word for word in a sort of circular logic(did I use that correctly?), leaving me to wonder if it's not some self perpetuating myth/hoax? As such, should it be even included as a real goat-antelope and not a cryptid without more hard evidence? ~ Concerned passerby  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.215.188.130 (talk) 23:26, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shapi? 

message: Please move this to Caprid and list it at proposed moves. --Eu-151 (talk) 19:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally I found "goat-antelope" awkward when I first encountered it here, but I must say I've got used to it a bit, and it does seem more widely used than it was.  Starting from scratch, I think I'd choose "Caprinae".  (Have I missed any?)  Whichever is best, do we have enough reason to change the current name?  Richard New Forest (talk) 20:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As to the word not being used outside Wikipedia, it's used as the relevant chapter heading in the 1984 edition of Macdonald's Encylopedia of Mammals, which I doubt was influenced by this site. Anaxial (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough – but precious few others of that date, surely?  Though really it's current usage we should go with, and if WP has indeed changed that, it's still usage.  Richard New Forest (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move 

message: This article conflicts with Muskox in showing a close relationship between it and the takin.  Some kind editor has made an explicit reference to the contradiction within the lead of the article on the takin which I'll remove as it does not help.  The Muskox article seems to contain the more up-to-date info, so the clade (if that is what it is) shown here needs to be sorted out to agree.Chrismorey (talk) 05:21, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:   Indeed, a complete phylogeny of Caprinae has been presented in "Unraveling the phylogenetic relationships of the extinct bovid Myotragus balearicus Bate 1909 from the Balearic Islands" direct link to relevant fig here, is this worth coding up as a cladogram? Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks to be in agreement with a number of other phylogenies I have seen in papers going back to the 2000s, which suggests that it's fairly robust and well-supported by now. So, yes, I'd say that would be a good thing to add. Anaxial (talk) 20:54, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classification