Talk:Caspian tiger

message: Added to the cleanup list. 68.81.164.226 04:16, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean up

message: *I just added the Neutrality tag because of the statement that  the extinction was caused by politicians; presumably they didn' talk it to death but maybe they authorised the actions that lead to its extinction by other people.  It need clarification.
ping 08:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the Neutrality tag, because when you read the whole article or even one sentence further, you read an explanation. I quote: "At the beginning of the 20th century, the Russian government worked heavily to eradicate the Caspian tiger during an extensive land reclamation program. There was no room for the tiger in their plans, and government officials instructed the Russian army to exterminate all tigers found around the area of the Caspian Sea, a project that was carried out very efficiently. Once the extermination of the Caspian tiger was almost complete, farmers cleared forests and planting crops such as rice and cotton. Due to intensive hunting and deforestation, the Caspian tiger retreated first from the lush lowlands to the forested ranges, then to the marshes around some of the larger rivers, and finally, deeper into the mountains, until it almost certainly became extinct." Sites that have also information on this are:  and . Pmaas 08:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also removed the disputed text, because it is also discussed in the chapter History and extinction. See quote in previous post. Pmaas 08:12, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Politics - Neutrality

message: :::I would just like to point out that the above text that you quote comes directly from the resource website Copy-and-Paste.  (Someone copied the article at http://www.lairweb.org.nz/tiger/caspian.html and pasted it into the article.) If this is not the case, if the website is copying the wiki article, then why would the website be listed as a reference?  Unless the wiki editor who copied the information is the same person who authored the referenced website, that is plagiarism.  Tsarevna (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism!

message: Its a bit crazy that this page has so much information and yet only ONE reference- I've added a "more sources needed" tag in light of this, hopefully it will facilitate some remedial action in this area. At present this article is almost worthless in terms of verifiability because its so poorly referenced. Kotare 09:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References- where are they?

message: *For some reason a bunch of editors are trying to make it seem like the animal still exists. It doesn't, so please quit it. Funkynusayri (talk) 20:02, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Rubbish, we have literature and photographs on the Caspian tiger having been in both Iran and other places. Heptner and Sludskii (1972) have [photographs] of skins of tigers from Central Asia.
 Leo1pard (talk) 13:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Extinct in the wild" 

message: The first opening sentence describes the subspecies as being extinct. The last sentence in the opening paragraph is currently "There are no individuals in captivity". Isn't this stating the obvious, considering it has already been established in the first sentence that the subspecies is extinct?  I propose to remove that sentence if there are no objections. Comments? Garth of the Forest (talk) 19:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it would seem so, wouldn't it?  However, the source (IUCN Red List) cites the same source (Nowell and Jackson 1996) twice, for both the "it's extinct" and "there are none in captivity" statements.  So the article is confusing because the source is confusing.  I'd remove the "captivity" sentence since the article sounds idiotic as it is now. --Seduisant (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't the last sentence of the first paragraph redundant, and therefore unnecessary? 

message: In light of new discoveries, this article should be merged with the Siberian tiger article.Mariomassone (talk) 13:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should be merged with Siberian tiger 

message: This is my first contribution to the world of Wikipedia so please bear with me, and in light of much of what I have read on the Wiki-Tiger discussion page alone: Please be polite to me, assume my good faith, avoid attacking me personally, and be welcoming.
I am concerned with this general article on tigers and with the articles on the Siberian/Amur tiger (P. t. altaica) and Caspian Tiger (P. t. virgata). Quoting a source that I found cited on this very page (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004125), recent research involving mitochondrial molecular genetics seems to be uncovering possible historic errors made in taxonomic subspecies definitions:
:quote - In the era before molecular taxonomy tiger subspecies definitions were based on classical criteria: geographical origin, gross size and pelage variation (hair length, color, stripe number and patterning) (Figure 1). Subspecies so described were often spurious as they were sometimes based on a single, possibly aberrant, individual, or from the unknowing sampling of clinal variation. Such methods led to a lack of consensus, repeated taxonomic revision, and debate. Though debate continues, eight tiger subspecies (three of which are extinct) are widely recognized based on these criteria. However the phylogeny of the five extant recognized tiger taxa (P. t. tigris, P. t. altaica, P. t. amoyensis, P. t. sumatrae, P. t. corbetti) was revisited recently using mitochondrial molecular genetics by Luo et al. who affirmed the validity of subspecies ranking for these groups. Additionally, these authors identified an equivalent sub-specific taxon unique to the Malay peninsula south of the Isthmus of Kra, formerly classified within P. t. corbetti but now designated as the Malay tiger, P. t. jacksoni.
The article goes on to describe how these new research results seem to indicate that that the Siberian subspecies is genetically so close to the Caspian subspecies as for them to be considered one and the same:
:quote - The Caspian tiger (Panthera tigris virgata) flourished in Central Asian riverine forest systems in a range disjunct from that of other tigers, but was driven to extinction in 1970 prior to a modern molecular evaluation. For over a century naturalists puzzled over the taxonomic validity, placement, and biogeographic origin of this enigmatic animal. Using ancient-DNA (aDNA) methodology, we generated composite mtDNA haplotypes from twenty wild Caspian tigers from throughout their historic range sampled from museum collections. We found that Caspian tigers carry a major mtDNA haplotype differing by only a single nucleotide from the monomorphic haplotype found across all contemporary Amur tigers (P. t. altaica). Phylogeographic analysis with extant tiger subspecies suggests that less than 10,000 years ago the Caspian/Amur tiger ancestor colonized Central Asia via the Gansu Corridor (Silk Road) from eastern China then subsequently traversed Siberia eastward to establish the Amur tiger in the Russian Far East. The conservation implications of these findings are far reaching, as the observed genetic depletion characteristic of modern Amur tigers likely reflects these founder migrations and therefore predates human influence. Also, due to their evolutionary propinquity, living Amur tigers offer an appropriate genetic source should reintroductions to the former range of the Caspian tiger be implemented.
The article concludes that in light of this new information there was a historical mistake in designating a new subspecies for the extant population found in far eastern Russia; in fact there never was a Siberian tiger subspecies.
:quote - Interruption of potential historical gene flow across the ancestral Eurasian distribution of P. t. altaica+P. t. virgata may have been too recent (<200 years) to accumulate sub-species level genetic differentiation and a single mtDNA transition may not sufficiently establish the differentiation required to assign each population to separate taxonomic categories. Depending on further study of nuclear genes and morphology, and in view of previous equivocal or conflicting morphological assessments, Caspian and Amur tigers (P. t. virgata, Illiger,1815 and P. t. altaica, Temminck, 1844, respectively) might be considered as synonymous under the prior P. t. virgata trinomial as prescribed by the rules of the ICZN, in which case pronouncing the Caspian tiger extinct may have been premature.
I would be most certainly in favor of keeping the Siberian Tiger subspecies page as many people will be looking to find a "Siberian tiger" page for years to come, but facts are facts; the Caspian tiger is still alive in far eastern Russia and the Siberian tiger subspecies never existed. I rely on Wikipedia daily for information, and I expect it to be accurate. But I have to say that certainly somebody with more Wiki experience than me has to undertake this project, and based on what I have read on the Wiki-Tiger discussion page it needs to be someone with Wiki-clout.
In postscript: I apologize for the excessive long entry, and my probable inability to format my entry properly (Altalaya (talk) 21:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment on the Wiki talk page - "Tiger"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altalaya (talk • contribs) 02:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Comments are welcome on impending changes to the Caspian, Siberian, and Tiger pages. Please direct comments to the Tiger discussion page (Altalaya (talk) 01:28, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the scientific name might change to P. tigris virgata for both, since this name is oldest, but I doubt anyone will begin using "Caspian" as a common name for the Siberian tigers. FunkMonk (talk) 17:18, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct subspecies name Siberian tiger vs. Caspian tiger 

message: The page Masai lion mentions that it has 2 trinomial names: P. l. massaica and P. l. nubica, and that of Cape lion says that the 'black-maned' Cape lion could be considered as a population of the Transvaal lion, due to their close relationship, even though the latter 2 articles have been kept separate. Leo1pard (talk) 17:39, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can I treat ''[[Panthera tigris altaica|P. t. altaica]]'' as a synonym for ''P. t. virgata'', nevertheless? 

message: Iranian and Russian ecologists are planning a joint project designed to return to the wild the Caspian Tigers as well as Asiatic Cheetahs in the Central Asian region. These big cats had disappeared, the Asiatic Cheetah from Russia and Caspian Tiger from Iran, some half a century ago. Latest genetic studies have shown that the Russian or Amur Tiger is related and virtually identical to the extinct Caspian Tigers and hence will be used to repopulated the Caspian Tiger range in exchange for Asiatic Cheetahs. Iran, Russia Hope to Revive Extinct Big Cats Asiatiac Cheetah and Caspian Tiger; Source: Press TV; 09 january 2010; Payvand Iran NewsMitochondrial Phylogeography Illuminates the Origin of the Extinct Caspian Tiger and Its Relationship to the Amur Tiger
==== RELATED NEWS (for the archival purposes) ====
Iran, Russia Hope to Revive Extinct Big Cats Asiatiac Cheetah and Caspian Tiger
01/09/2010; Source: Press TV; Payvand Iran News
Iranian and Russian ecologists have announced ambitious plans to return Caspian Tigers as well as Asiatic cheetahs, which disappeared some half a century ago in their countries, to the wild.
PHOTO: Asiatic cheetah
A delegation of Russian ecologists headed by Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation Sergey Donskoy arrived in Tehran a week ago to discuss avenues to reestablish the wild cats.
During the meeting, the Iranian ecologists shed light on the prospect of repopulating the jungles in northern Iran with extraordinary Caspian Tiger, which became extinct over 40 years ago.
This is while through modern genetic analysis it has been discovered the Caspian Tiger and the Siberian Tiger, still in existence, are separated by only one letter of genetic code. The Caspian Tiger can be reestablished by using their relative, the Siberian Tiger.
Russian and international conservation groups banned hunting of tiger in 1947, but it was too late for the Caspian Tiger to make a recovery. Poaching and contributing factors wiped out the majestic cat. Conservation efforts, however, did help to protect and stabilize the Siberian Tiger. Fortunately, the subspecies commingling in the distant past will allow the Caspian Tiger to once again take its rightful place in the family tree of tigers.
PHOTO: Caspian Tiger
The Russian ecologist asked for Iranian assistance in revival of Asiatic cheetahs in the northern Caucasus region.
Described as powerful and graceful hunters, cheetahs are the world's fastest animal and easy to train. Cheetahs were trained by ancient Persian kings, who used them to hunt gazelles.
Recognizing the cats' precarious situation, Iran's Department of Environment has worked with the UN Development Program-Global Environment Facility and Wildlife Conservation Society in New York since 2001 to save the only 50 to 60 Asiatic cheetahs which live in the Dasht-e Kavir region of Iran.
 
Payvand News - 01/09/10
SOURCE: http://www.payvand.com/news/10/jan/1082.html
mrigthrishna (talk) 12:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-population of Caspian Tiger Range with closely related Siberian / Amur Tiger in exchange for Asiatic Cheetah 

message: Iran, Russia Hope to Revive Extinct Big Cats Asiatiac Cheetah and Caspian Tiger
01/09/2010; Source: Press TV; Payvand Iran News
Iranian and Russian ecologists have announced ambitious plans to return Caspian Tigers as well as Asiatic cheetahs, which disappeared some half a century ago in their countries, to the wild.
PHOTO: Asiatic cheetah
A delegation of Russian ecologists headed by Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation Sergey Donskoy arrived in Tehran a week ago to discuss avenues to reestablish the wild cats.
During the meeting, the Iranian ecologists shed light on the prospect of repopulating the jungles in northern Iran with extraordinary Caspian Tiger, which became extinct over 40 years ago.
This is while through modern genetic analysis it has been discovered the Caspian Tiger and the Siberian Tiger, still in existence, are separated by only one letter of genetic code. The Caspian Tiger can be reestablished by using their relative, the Siberian Tiger.
Russian and international conservation groups banned hunting of tiger in 1947, but it was too late for the Caspian Tiger to make a recovery. Poaching and contributing factors wiped out the majestic cat. Conservation efforts, however, did help to protect and stabilize the Siberian Tiger. Fortunately, the subspecies commingling in the distant past will allow the Caspian Tiger to once again take its rightful place in the family tree of tigers.
PHOTO: Caspian Tiger
The Russian ecologist asked for Iranian assistance in revival of Asiatic cheetahs in the northern Caucasus region.
Described as powerful and graceful hunters, cheetahs are the world's fastest animal and easy to train. Cheetahs were trained by ancient Persian kings, who used them to hunt gazelles.
Recognizing the cats' precarious situation, Iran's Department of Environment has worked with the UN Development Program-Global Environment Facility and Wildlife Conservation Society in New York since 2001 to save the only 50 to 60 Asiatic cheetahs which live in the Dasht-e Kavir region of Iran.
 
Payvand News - 01/09/10
SOURCE: http://www.payvand.com/news/10/jan/1082.html
mrigthrishna (talk) 12:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  RELATED NEWS (for the archival purposes) 

message: === Issues with page ===
A user named Leo1pard has posted a lot of false and unnecessary on this page, yet attempts to remove it were met with simply restoring said information. The most obvious being their false claim that lions  are the same size as the largest tiger species, which goes against common knowledge and facts. They also add hybrids such as ligers, which is unnecessary and is mentioned on the liger article. They also claim that the Caspian tiger is merely "believed" to be extinct rather than officially extinct. And finally they link to the Tiger vs Lion page, which, given their other edits and comments, suggest their true motivation for these edits. Can someone please fix this page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.173.175 (talk) 16:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I did not merely say that lions and tigers are the same size, but that the Siberian, Caspian and Bengal tigers were the largest felidae apart from lions and hybrids like ligers, because ligers can be bigger than Siberian tigers in size, and there are references of lions exceeding  in weight, which would make them rival Bengal tigers, which today reportedly weigh  in the wild, and Caspian tigers, which apparently weighed  in the wild, at least, and I mentioned those references, but you also have to be careful of bias, because to mention Siberian, Caspian and Bengal tigers as being the biggest cats, quoting one reference, and excluding other references, constitutes bias, and it's like you did not take time to carefully read the references which I provided to talk about huge lions. Leo1pard (talk) 04:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: It is, however, worth mentioning that I had provided some other references which User BhagyaMani deleted in this article. Leo1pard (talk) 05:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: If I was that biased to the lion, then I would not respect what I would see as referenced information about say, tigers exceeding , or a Bengal tiger defeating a Barbary lion, let alone adding more details to that story. Plus, sightings of Caspian tigers are reported from time to time, and a recent one that I mentioned was apparently in 1997! Leo1pard (talk) 07:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: Nevertheless, I edited the information, to more accurately say what is in the references. Leo1pard (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caspian [[tiger versus lion]] 

message: A user named Leo1pard has posted a lot of false and unnecessary on this page, yet attempts to remove it were met with simply restoring said information. The most obvious being their false claim that lions  are the same size as the largest tiger species, which goes against common knowledge and facts. They also add hybrids such as ligers, which is unnecessary and is mentioned on the liger article. They also claim that the Caspian tiger is merely "believed" to be extinct rather than officially extinct. And finally they link to the Tiger vs Lion page, which, given their other edits and comments, suggest their true motivation for these edits. Can someone please fix this page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.173.175 (talk) 16:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I did not merely say that lions and tigers are the same size, but that the Siberian, Caspian and Bengal tigers were the largest felidae apart from lions and hybrids like ligers, because ligers can be bigger than Siberian tigers in size, and there are references of lions exceeding  in weight, which would make them rival Bengal tigers, which today reportedly weigh  in the wild, and Caspian tigers, which apparently weighed  in the wild, at least, and I mentioned those references, but you also have to be careful of bias, because to mention Siberian, Caspian and Bengal tigers as being the biggest cats, quoting one reference, and excluding other references, constitutes bias, and it's like you did not take time to carefully read the references which I provided to talk about huge lions. Leo1pard (talk) 04:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: It is, however, worth mentioning that I had provided some other references which User BhagyaMani deleted in this article. Leo1pard (talk) 05:14, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: If I was that biased to the lion, then I would not respect what I would see as referenced information about say, tigers exceeding , or a Bengal tiger defeating a Barbary lion, let alone adding more details to that story. Plus, sightings of Caspian tigers are reported from time to time, and a recent one that I mentioned was apparently in 1997! Leo1pard (talk) 07:26, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

text: Nevertheless, I edited the information, to more accurately say what is in the references. Leo1pard (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues with page 

message: How many people noticed that the Bengal tiger was not the only population, if not subspecies of Panthera tigris, that coexisted with the Asiatic lion, considering that the latter was recorded in places where the Caspian tiger had been, such as northern Iran and Khaurism?
 Leo1pard (talk) 13:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caspian tiger versus Asiatic lion 

message: I noticed that there is a moderate level of detail on the origin and distribution of the Caspian tiger, however there is room to expand on its expansion and range, especially before the 20th Century. This is especially due as the Caspian Tiger ranged north of the Black Sea (into Eastern Europe) as late as the Middle Ages, as per some of the sources below. As I have perpetual exams at the moment, I am going to leave these sources here to substantiate this article in the future, as this is an important element of the Caspian tiger's evolutionary history. I would be very grateful if anyone with the time could integrate relevant information/discussion from the sources below.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227785806_Biogeographical_change_in_the_tiger_Panthera_tigris
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ddi.12484/full
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400175.full
http://www.audubon.org/news/the-last-wild-tigers
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2624500/#pone.0004125-Kitchener1
Search on google the following WWF documents-
(Turanian Tiger- Analysis of Modern Situation PDF) +
(Pre-Feasibility Study on the Possible Restoration of the Caspian Tiger PDF)
SuperTah (talk) 03:39, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. Leo1pard (talk) 14:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

text: [This map] by Wilting et al. (2015) does depict the Caspian tiger as having occurred in North Caucasus which is in European Russia, and Heptner and Sludskii (1972) did talk about it being in Europe. In particular, they believed that the lyuti zver (Old Russian for "fierce animal") which non-fatally attacked Vladimir II Monomakh, Velikiy Kniaz of Kievan Rus', was a tiger. The zver was said to have sprung at the Prince and his horse, which reminds me of the way that this Bengal tiger attacked a mahout on his elephant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4t0aeTX954
 Leo1pard (talk) 13:56, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources on the evolutionary history of the Caspian tiger 

message: There is some inconsistency in Masseti (2009)'s article about carnivores in Syria: he claims tiger records in the Turkish Hatay Province with reference to Baytop (1974) and Kock (1990). But Kock (1990) did not mention ANY record in that province, and Baytop (1974) accounted of a skin obtained in Hakkari Province, which is much farther east. Also Masseti (2009) claims "archaeological evidence for the occurrence of tigers in the Amuq valley" with reference to Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951), whereas these authors did not mention such evidence. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:34, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It was also stated "This paper is almost entirely the result of a series of field surveys carried out by the author mainly between 1989 and 1995, integrated by data from several subsequent reports and sightings by other authors," that might help to explain that, especially as Masseti himself, in 2000, said that Baytop (1974) obtained a tiger's skin near Uludere in Hakkari Province, for example. Leo1pard (talk) 16:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference: Masseti 2009 

message: While cadpuan tiger mistly exusted iran .about mire than 90 percent if these tigers.and u doubt its even exusted in turkey or iraq ever .whay name if iran is not mentioned in the introduction part.and turkey can be seen in evert text of thus topic ? I guess thus text us anti iranian and fraud of real origin of thus exunct animal. Bahmanrajabiun (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If this was "anti-Iranian", why would Iran be shown in the map? Anyhow, if you want to add text, don't write in all-capitals. Make it look like the rest of the article. FunkMonk (talk) 20:41, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  caspuan tiger or persian iranian tiger 

message: Apart from the controversy over whether or not the IUCN's view is actually valid, I know that the IUCN proposed that tigers be grouped into P. t. tigris and P. t. sondaica, but does that mean that we should say that the IUCN is saying that the Caspian tiger is a population of the "Bengal tiger subspecies," which is commonly understood to mean tigers in South Asia, instead of the "Asian Mainland tiger subspecies"? Leo1pard (talk) 04:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Your question is ambiguous. Is it possible that you misunderstood the meaning of etymology? Or is your question about taxonomy? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is about taxonomy. The phrase "Bengal tiger" is used to mean tigers in South Asia, not the other tigers of the Asian mainland, it is the taxonomic name, Panthera tigris tigris, that the IUCN proposed classifying the other Asian mainland tigers into, and likewise what I mentioned for the regular and taxonomic names for the Cape lion and Javan tiger. Leo1pard (talk) 09:12, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text:  And by the way, the URL for this reference from the IUCN is dead, and what the IUCN said in this functional one, regarding their re-classification of lions, is "the Cat Classification Task Force of the IUCN SSC Cat Specialist Group has provisionally proposed a different split into two subspecies, P. l. leo of Asia and West, Central and North Africa, and P l. melanochaita from South and East Africa. However, Barnett et al. (2014) is based only on mtDNA and could reflect female philopatry," so the 'update' from the IUCN that we put into these articles about different lions and tigers could be in trouble, unless we take care to mention that this was said by the IUCN. Leo1pard (talk) 09:31, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text:  I put that information regarding the lion, to give you an idea about why the IUCN's reclassification of subspecies can be controversial. Leo1pard (talk) 09:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text: The members of the Cat Classification Taskforce (CCT) decided that from a taxonomic point of view the tiger populations in mainland Asia are not sufficiently distinct to warrant that many different trinomen. Hence the oldest subspecific names are used.    See download link that is not difficult to find :  --BhagyaMani (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Which other group of people or organisation do YOU consider more appropriate to discuss and revise taxonomic questions? Am pretty sure that your personal opinion and conclusions about taxonomic questions are not relevant for the CCT's decisions.-- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not necessarily 'more' appropriate, but remember, the IUCN's reclassification of tigers has been the subject of a dispute, and I do see one for lions, and we in Wikipedia are supposed to take a WP:Neutral POV, in the case of such disputes. Leo1pard (talk) 11:31, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text:  Here are references to give you an idea about what I mean.Just a handful of tiger subspecies remain in the wild — here they are ZME Science.  Mar. 30, 2017. By Elena Motivans.  Downloaded July 28, 2017.Subspecies listing for scientific names (genus: Panthera, species: tigris) Catalogue of Life.  Downloaded July 30, 2017. Leo1pard (talk) 12:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text: See my replies in Talk:Cape lion#Etymology of the lion subspecies, according to the view of the IUCN and  Talk:Bali tiger. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 12:57, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I did see them, but is not as simple as an editor like myself wanting to question their expertise: Do you remember what the case was for the Ethiopian lion? Leo1pard (talk) 13:22, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

text: Ditto. Leo1pard (talk) 16:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology regarding the tiger subspecies, according to the view of the IUCN 

message: Leo1pard (talk) 07:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page views 

message: See this. Leo1pard (talk) 07:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Bergmann's rule]] for ''[[felidae]]'' 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Caspian tiger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120309125526/http://www.science.smith.edu/msi/pdf/i0076-3519-152-01-0001.pdf to http://www.science.smith.edu/msi/pdf/i0076-3519-152-01-0001.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120423162028/http://www.nfwf.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home to http://www.nfwf.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=3060&TEMPLATE=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151117015740/http://www.threatenedtaxa.in/index.php/JoTT/article/view/1286 to http://www.threatenedtaxa.in/index.php/JoTT/article/view/1286
*Added  tag to http://www.princeton.edu/~eakcay/publications_files/sekercioglu_et_al2011.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004213331/http://www.wildtiger.org/caspiantiger.html to http://www.wildtiger.org/caspiantiger.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:03, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: See this. Leo1pard (talk) 07:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Caspian tigers prey on [[brown bear]]s? 

message: See this. Leo1pard (talk) 05:44, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Though there is a dispute over the number of extant subspecies of tigers, the dispute has nevertheless been mentioned here and there, and the fact is that the Caspian tiger is the same subspecies as the Siberian tiger, genetically speaking, which made a revision of subspecies necessary in the first place. The genetic difference between the Caspian and Siberian tigers (only 1 mtDNA haplotype) is insignificant compared to differences between populations of the Bengal tiger. Leo1pard (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your thanks, Leo1pard. As you can see below, this change of the lead sentence/s was prompted by Jts1882, who should also be credited, . -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:57, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done, and you're welcome :) Leo1pard (talk) 18:17, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute on tiger taxonomy 

message: See Talk:Bengal_tiger#First_sentence_structure. AnomalousAtom (talk) 08:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion about first sentence structure 

message: The purpose of a taxobox is to show the classification of the taxon that is the subject of the article. The article is about a population with the informal name "Caspian tiger". It is not about the subspecies, whether or not this is accepted by reliable sources. A manual taxobox with the population below some accepted rank is one solution. Another is no taxobox, on the grounds that Caspian tigers are not a distinct taxon at a rank accepted by the ICZN. A taxobox targeting a parent of the subject of the article is simply wrong, here or in any other article. It also messes up the placement of an extinct marker, as  pointed out at Wikipedia talk:Automated taxobox system/Archive 4#Bug?. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: please could you link to these pages? The use of a  on this page is simply not correct. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

text: I agree to your sigh! Yeeears ago, I had removed the box in one of the pages on a tiger population, with a similar argument : that it is not a subspecies. But then Jts1882 convinced me that the  is the most appropriate to use as it is essentially an infobox conveying the same overview as the longer taxobox. And ALL the es contain the presently correct subspecific name for the population, in this case P. tigris tigris. As do all the other pages on cat populations where this box is in use. That it is NOT a subspecies, is made crystal clear in the very first sentence on each of the resp. pages. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. This is NOT a subspecies, so the taxobox should not say that it is. Please see Talk:Panthera tigris tigris#Taxoboxes for populations of this subspecies for a wider discussion. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxobox