Talk:List of mammals of Turkey

message: Is there any reason I should not add this water buffalo into the article?
Or is this list not supposed to include domestic and feral animals? If so maybe the word "wild" should be inserted in the first sentence which currently reads "This is a list of the mammal species recorded in Turkey."
Chidgk1 (talk) 07:51, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. :All the other 'List of mammals of ..' contain only wildlife but not domestic / livestock species. But in none of these lists is the term 'wild' mentioned explicitly. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Bubalus bubalis

message: The current IUCN RL shows 150 extant mammals in Turkey + 7 with presence uncertain. So quite a few more than announced in the lead of this page. This lead was written perhaps 20 years ago without being updated? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I think a good cut off point for extirpated mammals would be anytime in the last 150 years (i.e. after 1850 or so). This would make them relatively recent extinctions, so that things like aurochs and cave lions are counted, for instance. Thoughts? Ddum5347 (talk) 19:04, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cut off point

message: I am not an expert but Persian fallow deer and
https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/6232/97672550#geographic-range
say extinct in Turkey.Chidgk1 (talk) 10:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes!! That's why I removed fallow deer, which is anyway a different species that never occurred in Turkey but is native to western Europe only. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 11:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi guys. To my knowledge, the evidence for Persian fallow deer in Turkey (Anatolia) is somewhat problematic. It is only known palaeontologically from the SE, and the fossils show both the Persian as well as the nominate phenotypes (based on antler shapes) -a hybrid population at the site is suspected. We are talking about Neolithic fauna though, you could then also add many more species to these lists! Moreover, the nominate fallow deer is the taxon found throughout Anatolia in historic times, and, according to this paper, is still extant (although if this population is truly 'wild'...).  Leo Breman (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fallow deer? 

message: https://www.cnnturk.com/yasam/turkiyede-nesli-tukenmekte-olan-hayvanlar claimed they were here in 2018
but https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989420302456 said none in 2019.
So is CNN Turk an unreliable source or were they extirpated between the dates of the 2 sources?
Chidgk1 (talk) 12:47, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: See IUCN RL account at https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/4007/115067136#geographic-range dating to 2016. This is certainly more reliable than an article in a newspaper. IF that article relies on a peer-reviewed publication, then lets find it. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:39, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beaver? 

message: In the lead of each and every country list of mammals, the IUCN Red List is unmistakably introduced as reference for the status of species in the respective country. At present, neither moose nor cheetah are listed as having occurred and been extirpated in Turkey. I therefore removed both from this country list. If anybody is of the opinion that the IUCN Red List assessors made a mistake, then this encyclopedia is not the place to doubt or override their assessments. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:42, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  IUCN Red List 

message: Kryštufek & Vohralík (2001) about insectivores in Turkey and Cyprus indeed stated that  on page 31.Kryštufek, B. & V. Vohralík (2001). Mammals of Turkey and Cyprus: introduction, checklist, Insectivora. Koper: Zgodovinsko društvo za južno Primorsko. The source referenced by these authors -- Harper, 1945 Extinct and vanishing mammals of the Old World -- did however NOT list Turkey as a historic cheetah range country : see https://archive.org/details/extinctvanishing00harprich/page/284/mode/2up and previous pages in this book. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The reliability of this book is doubtful, since Turkey is NOT listed in the cheetah IUCN Red List among the countries, where it is extinct. Interestingly, a blocked user or their sockpuppet added this same ref more than a year ago and also argued that this is reliable. – BhagyaMani (talk) 04:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the IUCN should remain the primary source. I'll investigate to see if any other sources back this up. Monserrrr (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I have requested a quote from the book for its use in the Asiatic cheetah article. I read that in Ottoman times the sultans had to import them as they were not in the country. But https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/poaching-isnt-rare-cheetahs-only-problem-180962808/ mentions them in passing. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good read. Think you should add it. Monserrrr (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I've found these sources: , , , . Some of these seem reliable, others not so much. Monserrrr (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheetah in Turkey? 

message: The source for the cheetah being present in Turkey is not an IUCN assessment, but it is still a WP:RS, and similar to the sources used for the cheetah and other large predators in the "list of mammals of" pages for the Caucasus nations. I think  should be consistent; either remove all non-IUCN sources from these lists, or allow them. Monserrrr (talk) 04:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The reliability of this book is doubtful, since Turkey is NOT listed in the cheetah IUCN Red List among the countries, where it is extinct. Interestingly, a blocked user or their sockpuppet added this same ref more than a year ago and also argued that this is reliable. – BhagyaMani (talk) 04:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the IUCN should remain the primary source. I'll investigate to see if any other sources back this up. Monserrrr (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I have requested a quote from the book for its use in the Asiatic cheetah article. I read that in Ottoman times the sultans had to import them as they were not in the country. But https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/poaching-isnt-rare-cheetahs-only-problem-180962808/ mentions them in passing. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good read. Think you should add it. Monserrrr (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

text: I've found these sources: , , , . Some of these seem reliable, others not so much. Monserrrr (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheetah again

message: Not quite sure why extinct mammals seem to create more arguments on this article than live ones, but as we are all trying to do our best for the animals if anyone is annoyed by another person's edit feel free to ask me for a (non-expert) third opinion if you think that might help take the heat away. If I am slow to reply I can say it was a deliberate calming measure - ha ha. Or I could just say the answer is to rewild and see if I can stir up rewilding arguments instead of editing arguments. Chidgk1 (talk) 14:52, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  If anyone would like a third opinion please ask 

message: Should we include coypu? As usual foreigners are blamed - apparently they migrated from Bulgaria https://www.aksam.com.tr/gunes/anavatani-guney-amerika-edirnede-su-maymunu-istilasi/haber-1223636
Chidgk1 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The article starts out with "This list shows the IUCN Red List status of the 150 wild mammal fauna of Turkey", so I'd say that if they are on the IUCN Red List for Turkey, they should be included. SchreiberBike | ⌨  17:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Turkey is not listed among the countries where it was introduced on resp. IUCN RL. So I would not add it to this page. – BhagyaMani (talk) 17:08, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I am confused - it was not introduced - it invaded under its own power. Chidgk1 (talk) 19:17, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ^Still counts as introduced.  Monserrrr (talk) 18:03, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Turkey is listed in the distribution at http://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/speciesname/Myocastor+coypus and they are included in Turkish Wikipedia. So I think they should be included as the evidence is conclusive. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:24, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should invasive species be included?