Talk:Sea mink

message: Does anyone know any museums that have specimens- skeletal or mounted? Also, ANY illustration at all- I've never seen even a drawing. CFLeon 04:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specimens? 

message: Although I've seen references to the Sea Mink eating sea birds, I haven't seen any indication in any sources I've read that the extinction of the Labrador Duck is in any way a factor in the extinction of the sea mink. Can anyone supply a reference?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Petemella (talk • contribs) 12:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Labrador Duck 

message: What about the Thylacine?--Withlyn (talk) 13:46, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also the extinction of the Giant Fossa (Cryptoprocta spelea). And besides the Sea Mink, the Falkland Wolf and Giant Fossa there are more recent or historic extinctions in the order of Carnivora, like the Caribbean Monk Seal (Monachus tropicalis) and the Japanese Sea Lion (Zalophus japonicus). Only I guess they are not considered terrestrial. Peter Maas\talk 19:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not clear when the giant fossa went extinct, but there are no historic observations. Goustien (talk) 16:08, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of two terrestrial mammalian carnivores to go extinct in modern times? 

message: The "Extant species of family Mustelidae" group should not be displayed as the sea mink is extinct.--74.105.16.42 (talk) 21:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  grouping 

message: I just noticed, quite late, that under synonyms, you have "Lutreola macrodon Wagner, 1841". This has some implications for the article, first, it wasn't named in  1903, it was only moved to a new genus then, and if we assume this is correct, it was actually named before it went extinct. So both the text and the taxobox seems to be wrong, what do you think, ? FunkMonk (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The 1903 Prentiss paper describes it as a new species, Lutreola macrodon.  It looks like Wagner named the genus Lutreola in 1841, but did so for Mustela lutreola, not for the sea mink, per this review by Hollister 1965 Cephal-odd (talk) 14:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, in that case, how come it is listed as a synonym here? Doesn't make sense, even if we assume the two were considered one back then, that name can not be a synonym of both. FunkMonk (talk) 14:33, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:47, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

text:    User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  14:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was it named, and by who? 

message: What does "Head to tail" means in :
 91.4 centimeters (36 in) from head to tail, with the tail being 25.4 centimeters (10 in) long
Does it means its full length was 36in or 36+10 = 46in ? It's really not clear --Yug (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: it means from head to tail (as in, the combined measurements of the head and of the tail) it was 36 inches, and the entire tail itself (as in, only the tail and nothing but the tail) was 10 inches   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  00:59, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Head to tail" ?