Talk:Elephant/Archive 1

message: The information about Natalie Portman dressing up as an elephant is completely irrelevant.--XmarkX 10:02, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Natalie Portman

message: I think it might be worthwhile mentioning, perhaps in the pop culture section, about two commonly used portrayals of elephants:
*They never forget
*They are scared of mice
violet/riga (t) 13:23, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  never forgetting and mice 

message: I was reading this Nature article (which could have some info to be put in here) and was struck by the niggling question:
:Is a person who studies modern elephants called a Loxodontist?
If not, what then.--ZayZayEM 03:16, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  OKay, this might be random... 

message: Regarding the following text: "The tip of an elephant's trunk contains pacinian corpuscles and finger-like projections used to manipulate small objects and to pluck grasses." Does anybody know whether the pacinian corpuscles are actually the finger-like projections on the tip of the trunk. If so, this phrase needs slight editing. Zingi 05:22, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pacinian corpuscle / finger-like projections at tip of trunk

message: Someone attempted to categorize this article under :Category:Endangered species (unsuccessfully, since they capitalized it wrong). I was going to fix the capitalization, but then hesitated, since an elephant isn't a species per se, it's a group of them. The category itself seems to apply more specifically, for instance to the Asian Elephant. So should the category here simply be removed? Everyking 08:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Category

message: "African elephants tend to be larger than the Asian species (up to 4 m high and 7500 kg)" says the article.  Which are 4m high & 7.5 t: the Asian or the African?  And how about the other variety? And why is this not in the Body characteristics section?  Jimp 5Oct05
The largest elephant on record was a male African elephant that was 4 m high (at the shoulder). On average, African elephants are 3-4 m tall, and Asian elephants 2-3 m tall (at the shoulder). - Nunh-huh 07:44, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Size 

message: There are these "elephant graveyards", places full of elephant bones where elephants go to die. I have heard that these do not really exist and are merely a myth. Can someone please add info about this to the article? 83.88.132.80 21:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The above is really me. SpectrumDT 17:43, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read (forgot where, some book about evolutionary psychology I think) that elephant teeth grind down as they age, and eventually they cannot eat. All that remains is to drink and wait for starvation. I'd imagine many elephants would gather around areas with water when in this condition. Thursday Postal 22:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Elephant graveyards? 

message: Do we really need the image of elephants mating in the article?Do we need to see elephant porno? Does it add much useful info that wouldn't be found there otherwise? The image could be disgusting, but I can't see it so I don't know. from the comments on this site, maybe it's not too bad, but this article *could* be read by children or concerned caregivers. Graham/pianoman87 talk 06:20, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image of elephants mating? 

message: This was recently added to the article (I've applied a few typo corrections):
"As a function of dwindling numbers, it is hard to understand why so much attention is focused on the African elephant's plight when the Asian population is much more threatened than its more popular relative."
This is meant to be an intro sentence, I know, but is there something less POV that can be used? The new expansions are mostly good ones, but sources need to be cited for some of the claims. Graham/pianoman87 talk 13:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this sentence supposed to mean? 

message: The numbers given for Asian elephants are inconsistent. First we are told there is a total of 40000, then we hear of 35000 on Sri Lanka, 36000 on the mainland and 33000 to 53000 on Sumatra. Can someone knowledgable fix this? I'm only knowledgable about some integers, but not about elephants.... --Stephan Schulz 16:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asian Elephant numbers are inconsistent 

message: In the pop culture section: "There is a factual basis for the legend, however: unique among land mammals, elephants' legs are hollow, affording the opportunity for small creatures such as mice to hide inside without detection."
I read this, and couldn't believe it. So I tried googling a few things, came up with nothing. I would think something as odd as this would be mentioned elsewhere on the Internet, if it's true. Can someone supply a reference, a picture, or both? Hollow legs? What does that mean? Hollow legbones, or do they actually have holes in their feet or something? This just doesn't sound right.--Rablari Dash 05:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't worry, it's just a childish joke from someone. I have deleted that whole silly paragraph - Adrian Pingstone 19:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It had just been there for over a week, so I wondered if people had just accepted it, or hadn't noticed it. Thanks for fixing it! Still, isn't it worth mentioning that, at least in America, some people believe that elephants are afraid of mice, and are portrayed as such in humor, especially cartoons? Does this perception exist in any other countries, or is it just America? -- Rablari Dash 04:57, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hollow legs? 

message: A lot of the article, particularly Habitat Loss and Elephant Rage, sounds like a WWF pamphlet.  Whether or not the information stated in these sections is true, it should probably be reworded or at least considered for revision with regards to the NPOV policy.  I've tagged the article with a POV check. erhudy
* Let me clarify - as some people have expressed above, a lot of it seems directly transcribed from a National Geographic narration.  Since the programs do tend to have a pro-environmentalist theme to them, it would probably be beneficial to adjust the wording of the contentious sections.
Yeah, I'm seconding this. It does seem like there is a huge swath of information about the loss of elephant habitats that is perhaps directly about elephants, but perhaps not neccessarily suitable to belong in this encyclopaedia article. I believe the article should be far more focussed about covering key points well and leading people to further resources, as opposed to becoming extremely heavy in one particular area. AdamSebWolf
:so, make the habitat stuff a sub-article Elephant Habitat, or some such.  no need to delete the material. Derex 05:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I also agree that the Habitat loss section should be moved into a separate article. That should make the article much shorter and NPOV.--Raghu 17:54, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article not compliant with NPOV? 

message: Which seems to have disappeared from Wikipedia. So, I thought I'd mention it here.
The Blind Men and the Elephant
A fascinating children's story based on a folk tale dating back at least two-thousand years offers direct insight into what happens when an encompassing view is not taken in studying a problem. In this tale there are six men who, though very knowledgeable, are blind. Together they encounter an elephant and each gives his analysis of the creature. Their interpretations are based on the particular part of the elephant they happen to touch.
The first blind man touches the sturdy side and declares the elephant to be very much like a wall.
The second blind man felt the elephant's sharp tusk and declared the elephant to be like a great spear.
The third blind man grasped at the squirming trunk and, with postive authority, announced that elephants are certainly like snakes.
The fourth blind man slid his hands along the elephant's broad knee and said that clearly an elephant can be best described as a tree.
Now the fifth blind man examined the elephant's waving ear, and was convinced that the elephant was some sort of fan.
And the last, the sixth blind man grabing at the elephant's swinging tail declared to all around that an elephant is absolutely like a rope.
Each is partly right since they have made contact with one major part of the whole. However, they are all wrong because in their blindness they failed to comprehend the creature in its entirety. Too often in information systems work, the limited perspectives (particular blindnesses) of the individuals making a study lead to similar failures in perception.
These failures result in developing computer capabilities that do not meet the needs of users. Perhaps an all too common example within a corporation could be exemplified when the vice-president of accounting (often the tail that wags the elephant!) makes the decisions regarding the information systems needed, without serious consideration and vision of the needs of the engineering, manufacturing, sales, and other departments that actually generate the value and revenue of the organization. In an elegant way, this children's story clearly illustrates the need for comprehensive study prior to the implementation of an information system in a company. So, as is often the case with "stories" of enduring interest, they contain the seeds of wisdom acquired by a culture through centuries of practical experience.
If you would like to relive your childhood memory of first hearing this tale, (it was here on Wiki) or share it with your children, a well-illustrated version is John Godfrey Saxe's The Blind Men and the Elephant (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1963). The children's section of most public libraries will have Saxe's or another version of this valuable insight for the information-systems designer.
Albert Turner — Software engineer
201.250.35.149 14:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been moved in its entirety to Wikisource: s:The Blindmen and the Elephant -- Ec5618 01:56, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Blind Men and the Elephant 

message: I just checked the history of the article and the article used to say prehistoric man ate elephants.  This seems somewhat more plausible to me, as elephants are now herbivores.  I'm not a biology major by any stretch of the imagination, so I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but is that a mistake? CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 06:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Prehistoric elephants ate humans" 

message: Please add more pictures of cute baby elephants.Golfcam 15:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Baby elephants

message: "The elephant is the only animal to have four knees."
This just sounds so absurd and makes no sense at all. Does it have four knees per leg or four knees all together? It needs some serious explanation. I mean there are millions of four legged animals, yet there's no explanation in it and I know personally I assumed all four legged animals had four knees and I've studied biology, what chance does a lay person have?
:I agree, that's why I remove it every now and then. I'll remove it now. The section is not informative. Graham talk 07:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it should have been removed, since it wasn't well explained, and didn't have a reference.  I've been told the same thing by an anatomy lecturer, though, so I'm pretty sure it's true.  I don't know enough about it yet to talk authoritatively on the subject, but as I understand it tetrapods generally have different joints in the forelimbs (arms in humans) than in the hindlimbs (legs in humans).  Because of their enormous weight, elephants need in all four legs a joint capable of supporting a lot of weight, so they have a "knee", a hind-limb style joint, in their forelegs.  I think the difference is something to do with the way that the condyles interact to stabilise the leg when it's straight.  --Hughcharlesparker 13:48, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I, also, think that it's true to say that an elephant has four knees, but for us to include this in the article we need to be able to me more specific about exactly what we mean by that - was I right about it being something to do with the condyles?  Is it something else about the way the bones interact?  Does the cruciate ligament system work the same in an elephant's foreleg as in a human knee?  Unless we're specific, it's not encyclopedic material.  The main problem, though, is verifiability - unless we can quote a source, we can't quote the fact.  The WP:Neutral point of view policy explains this well.  --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 11:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the difference you're talking about is that between those species that are plantigrade, digitigrade and unguligrade.  An elephant's hind leg knee is lower than that of a horse, but anatomically analogous.  The difference being discussed earlier is about an elephant's foreleg knees.  --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 15:50, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knees 

message: What is the strength of an elephant in watts. I couldn't find anything, not even with google. Help!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.79.136 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 6 May 2006 UTC
:I'd ask this at the reference desk if I were you - it's linked from the main page.  --Hughcharlesparker 13:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Strength

message: I removed a "it should be noted" claim that elephants can't jump. (I don't like the phrase "it should be noted" to begin with, but anyway).
I removed it because I remember reading that adult elephants have been seen jumping over a ravine in the wild, and that baby elephants definitely can do it. But after removing the claim I started searching the net and have to admit that most pages I can find on the subject do state that elephants can't jump. So maybe I'm wrong, or rather the article I read (some time ago) was wrong. Or maybe not. If any elephant experts here know that elephants can't jump, feel free to put the claim back, preferably with a citation. And preferably without phrasing it as a "It should be noted"... Shanes 04:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jumping elephants 

message: The "Musth" section gives two different etymologies for the origin of the word, Hindi and Urdu/Farsi, with no connection or explanation. 68.39.174.238 16:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Hindi Musth and Urdu Mast are the same IMHO. Hindi derives most of the word from Sanskrit no doubt, but it should also be noted that Urdu was the official Language of India before its independence (and consequent division). Hindi derives many words from Urdu, both languages being two different results from introduction of Farsi into older languages.
--Anupam Srivastava 18:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction...