Talk:Cheetah

message: Careful, the cheetah, like the lion, is one of those species which the Cat Specialist Group had trouble with. It is possible that there are only two valid subspecies, a northern subspecies comprising the Asiatic, Northeast and Northwest African cheetahs, and a southern subspecies comprising the Southeast and Southern African cheetahs, similar to the case of lions being divided into a northern subspecies (including North African and Asiatic populations) and southern subspecies (though issues like that of genetic admixture have to be treated with caution). Leo1pard (talk) 16:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  As in, big trouble for anyone wishing to use classifications by the Cat Specialist Group about which types are subspecies or not, as if they can be used definitely. Leo1pard (talk) 17:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Again: so what is this about? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:48, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That you have to be more careful about what you often do, because the CSG admitted that there are a number of things which they aren't sure about, but often, you act as if that's not the case. Leo1pard (talk) 05:24, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

text: I don't need a personal teaching by an amateur!! -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  How disrespectful. Nobody on Wikipedia knows everything. If you've been editing articles, and someone wants to talk to you about some errors that you made, like what I mentioned about the cheetahs, is this how you're going to treat that person? Leo1pard (talk) 15:50, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncertainty over subspecies 

message: ]ɱ  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhi04101997 (talk • contribs) 01:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  running time of cheetah with maximum speed 

message: thi is wrong because Paratarsotomus macropalpis is fastest animal on earth it is discovered by scientists in 2014  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:419D:2ECD:5B05:698D:DB1D:2596 (talk) 10:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the Paratarsotomus macropalpis article it "the world's fastest land animal relative to body length". The cheetah is faster in absolute terms.   Jts1882 | talk  11:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  see it once  

message: Why does it mention Palestine instead of Israel?? Please change it to Israel. Its sickening that some individuals take advantage of the wikipedia platform in order to advance their anti Israel agenda. If some would argue Israel was created in 1948, way after the Cheetahs extinction, then one can argue that Israel was founded before Iran (1979) and Syria (1961). 
Distribution and habitat
... In Eurasia, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Palestine, Syria, and the Ganga and Indus river valleys in South Asia sheltered large numbers of cheetahs.[33]
EDITED VERSION
... In Eurasia, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Syria, and the Ganga and Indus river valleys in South Asia sheltered large numbers of cheetahs.[33]
:. It really depends on what the cited source says. The editor who added that was expanding the article from cited sources and there is no evidence of editing with an ideological agenda.
:User:Sainsf added that in this edit.  you have access to the cited source; what does it actually say?
:In my opinion, no countries should be mentioned at all, because cheetahs have no notion of political boundaries. Instead, the region covered by these countries should be described. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:50, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The cited source is available online and indeed mentions 'Palestine' as historical range country of the cheetah, see 2nd column on page 25. Just edited this ref. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:14, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please change Palestine to Israel 

message: According to WP:CITEVAR: . I don't think the recent changes to use  are an improvement and think they should be reverted until there is consensus for such a change.    Jts1882 | talk  08:57, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully agree: this change is no improvement and should be reverted. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:25, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, sorry for the trouble. I was unaware of this. You can revert the changes I made to the citation style, I am not sure how to perfectly undo it without changing a few other things I fixed between edits. I plan on improving this article for FAC, and will be putting this up for a peer review soon. Probably that would be a good place to discuss the style. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  The reason I didn't revert it immediately was because that would revert the many good changes you have been making. Your work here and at Ocelot is appreciated. The footnote style editing isn't used much in articles on species and biological taxa, it's more appropriate for biographical works where major works are cited many times. Unfortunatly the citation and other edits are mixed across many sections so selective reverts is not possible. I think the best approach would be to revert todays changes (different=934022022&oldid=933939004 these edits) and redo the other changes. I can help with that.   Jts1882 | talk  10:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you :) I'm fine with the revert, I'll redo the lost changes later (any help in any part of improving the article is more than welcome). The reason I went for the sfn citation style was that I have around 5 book sources with many useful chapters (see  and  for instance) that I plan to use significantly in the article to give it the requisite broadness of an FA, but I was unsure how to cite several chapters from a single book (I will be using almost the whole of the book, do I go for page ranges separated by semicolons in just one citation or write multiple citations for each chapter of each book?) Then I saw the sfn citation style in  Wolf, and remembered its use in an FA I had worked on with other editors (Bluebuck). Thing is, if not sfn, what would be a good way of writing citations in my case that would also look neat enough for FA standards? I am open to suggestions. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 12:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if there were a large number of books being repeatedly cited, that could be a justification for switching the citation style to use  or . That is what this discussion is for, to establish consensus. However, as the article already has over 200 citations that seems unnecessary, at least at this stage (the feature article reviewers may feel otherwise). Another option is to use the  or  templates, for instance first use and second use. There is further information at WP:IBID, WP:CITESHORT and .   Jts1882 | talk  15:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot for all the help . I have seen  or  templates at places but I had never thought of using those. They fit in perfectly here, will use them in the article from now on. Please revert the citation style changes as you feel right, I will pick up my work on the article after that. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 16:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:   See Help_talk:Citation_Style_1#citing_different_pages_of_the_same_book for another approach, putting the short citations in the main reference list. —  Jts1882 | talk  07:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks . I will read it soon. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing citation style without concensus 

message: Cheetahs used to be in Mandate of Palestine or now, Israel & Jordan.  “Palestine,” Mordor OT Narnia is a mythological land. AlonTree (talk) 11:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Material in Wikipedia has to follow reliable sources. The cited source says Palestine (on p23). If the source mentioned Morder or Narnia, the article would have reflected that sourced information. —  Jts1882 | talk  12:02, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  “Palestine”?  What is that mythological land? 

message: The etymology section has an error. It has a phrase reading चित्रय (cītra); cītra is not correct. The Sanskrit says citraya instead (all short vowels, plus a syllable is forgotten too! How does this happen?). I'm posting this up because I cannot edit this article. 153.33.60.3 (talk) 01:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This spelling is referenced by sources. Please check them. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 05:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Easy: चि ci त्र tra य ya. It's very basic Devanagari. And anyway, cītra चीत्र​ is totally unattested; it is not a word. Therefore चित्रय must be the correct one. If you want an alternative argument, we can turn to diachronics. Just off the top of my head, I say with full confidence citraya is more correct: citraya > *cittaya > *cittaa > cītā; compare *cītra > *cītta > *cīt. 153.33.60.3 (talk) 00:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Also, the source cited does not say cītra; it literally says "kitraya" (it seems to me that the dictionary uses ⟨k⟩ for what's usually ⟨c⟩—unusual, but it is what it is) 153.33.60.3 (talk) 02:48, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Hmm, it seems चित्रक citraka is a better etymology anyway, considering one of its meanings was "hunting-leopard" or "Cheeta [sic]" in Sanskrit.https://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/citraka According to the source cited in the article, citraya simply means "painted," which in my opinion seems weaker than "Cheeta." 153.33.60.3 (talk) 08:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in Etymology section 

message: Taming:
change: Kublai Khan (1260–1294 BC)
to: Kublai Khan (1260-1294 AD)
Kublai Khan's reign was not BC.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan 100.11.21.132 (talk) 02:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: . I'm surprised that survived since it was introduced in April 2020. —  Jts1882 | talk  07:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2021 

message: Under Social organization we have some similar information regarding cubs/coalitions. 
*In most cases, a coalition will consist of brothers born in the same litter who stayed together after weaning, but biologically unrelated males are often allowed into the group; in the Serengeti 30% members in coalitions are unrelated males.
*If a cub is the only male in a litter he will typically join an existing group, or form a small group of solitary males with two or three other lone males who may or may not be territorial. In the Kalahari Desert around 40% of the males live in solitude.
I have grouped these two portions together. And now, the following info regarding coalitions is together. But, the original  sentences 
*"If a cub is the only male in a litter he will typically join an existing group, or form a small group of solitary males with two or three other lone males who may or may not be territorial. In the Kalahari Desert around 40% of the males live in solitude. A coalition generally has a greater chance of encountering and acquiring females for mating, however, its large membership demands greater resources than do solitary males."
had two sources, and I have split the sentences, although I copied both sources, Nowak and Hunter. I don't know if the sources need to be adjusted, as I can't access many pages of "Wildcats of the World" (Luke Hunter). Please review and help, if you can. Thanks, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 04:05, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , that book is available for download on zbooks. . LittleJerry (talk) 22:01, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , thanks, I will check this! Very kind of you.... Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 04:53, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to Social organization 

message: From the log it appears the page is semi protected since 2010. The discussion at WP:RFPP seems to no longer be in the archives, and there are no notice as why the page is protected even here.
Anyone remember the cause and whether it is still applicable ?
CrocodilienAnonyme (talk) 13:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a pretty popular page and was probably vandalized pretty frequently before being semi-protected. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 14:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection reason 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) cub.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for November 16, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-11-16. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: I thought it was standard procedure to list the IUCN Red List, and, if applicable, CITES designations, for the conservation status of any animal species, which reflect worldwide consensus. Why use an American system for a species that's not even found in the United States? --An anonymous username, not my real name (talk) 00:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point !!! It is NOT at all needed in the box. – BhagyaMani (talk) 07:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this include their ESA conservation status? 

message: Please remove these three phrases:
 neglect of cubs by mothers
 Cheetahs are poor breeders in captivity, while wild individuals are far more successful
 Though she tries to make minimal noise she usually can not defend her litter from these predators.
and replace them with these three:
 maternal neglect
 Wild cheetahs are far more successful breeders than captive cheetahs
 Despite trying to make minimal noise, she cannot generally defend her litter from predators.
"Maternal neglect" is a common term, and while most results (unsurprisingly) are human-related, the concept itself isn't.  "Can not" is not normal, a common is beneficial, and the identity of "these" predators isn't given.  All three phrases are shorter without losing anything of significance. 120.21.112.28 (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: ★Ama TALK CONTRIBS 16:45, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2022 

message: Two sets now present in Kuno national park, MP India  and historical range. 2604:CA00:138:33BB:0:0:C61:3212 (talk) 16:19, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheetahs in India 

message: "The researchers suggested that a hunt consists of two phases—an initial fast acceleration phase when the cheetah tries to catch up with the prey, followed by slowing down as it closes in on it, the deceleration varying by the prey in question. The peak acceleration observed was 2.5 m/s (8.2 ft/s), while the peak deceleration value was 7.5 m/s (25 ft/s)."
The incorrect units used m/s and ft/s are of speed, not acceleration.  Acceleration is a rate of change of velocity with time and has to include a time squared component.  It is written in the SI system as m.s-2 (ft.s-2 archaic). KlinkyWik (talk) 08:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also not clear where the numbers come from. One of the Wilson et al (2013, Nature) papers says the average deceleration in successful hunts was -7.5ms-2, while Fig 3d shows it can reach double that. Fig 3d also shows accelerations up to about -12ms-2, although I don't see an average mentioned. The RS paper says the fastest (GPS-derived) linear acceleration was 7.5ms-2". There is also a ridiculous amount of precision in that paragraph when describing the maximum speeds. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect units used for acceleration 

message: 1. https://www.arabnews.com/node/2297351/saudi-arabia?fbclid=IwAR0YCqNJtTk0Qktrpv9gpPMd8nXAduamuyqQCB5mNjpuY38-wq0zoyTy_n0_aem_th_AUpbsfGMfvl5ZZVjP3EEPLQ3w5GER4JILERfs-JYVNBriBQVKWdBa05hRVhS6QalpCY&mibextid=S66gvF 
2. https://www.saudigazette.com.sa/article/632156?fbclid=IwAR2Sfb3wCFOwVzhiExjF7Q34I6U9AETuMhiI9PYIn_yEearSeHv9NfewN3c_aem_th_AUppqgthZEFNtkwJq_cBHkDMbrAm_MBBGbG7nyVIyJ_vGaeIvRqT1QUkVYUJGSvWFBo&mibextid=Zxz2cZ Ovie11 (talk) 01:33, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheetah Reintroduction in Saudi Arabia.  

message: Please change:
 is a large cat native to Africa and Southwest Asia (today restricted to central Iran).
to 
 is a large cat native to Africa and central Iran.
This would bring the introductory sentence back to what it was before a change in February 2023. 
The current wording is far too confusing – it sounds like we're saying that today it only lives in Iran, instead of Africa and Iran. 
194.105.229.8 (talk) 19:17, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: 💜  melecie  talk - 00:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 July 2023 

message: In connection to this sentence "... it has evolved specialized adaptations for speed, including a light build, long thin legs and a long tail" which lacks any serious/significant  information, with references, on physiological and anatomical adaptation for speed.
Williams, T. M., et al. "Skeletal muscle histology and biochemistry of an elite sprinter, the African cheetah." Journal of Comparative Physiology B 167 (1997): 527-535.
 https://williams.eeb.ucsc.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/CheetahMuscleHistology_WilliamsEtAl1997.pdf
Hudson, Penny E., Sandra A. Corr, and Alan M. Wilson. "High speed galloping in the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) and the racing greyhound (Canis familiaris): spatio-temporal and kinetic characteristics." Journal of Experimental Biology 215.14 (2012): 2425-2434.
 https://www.originalwisdom.com/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/2019/10/Hudson-et-al_2012_High-speed-galloping-in-the-cheetah-and-the-racing-greyhound.pdf Richard Hawkins (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay... so why aren't you gleaning information from those sources and uptaing the article? - UtherSRG (talk) 10:58, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Because this page, unlike any other I have worked on is closed. Richard Hawkins (talk) 11:03, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are extended-confirmed, you should be able to edit it as it is semi-protected., not full protected. SilverTiger12 (talk) 14:13, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

text: As SilverTiger12 said. In addition, if you are not able to edit it, you can propose specific changes here via the  template. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just two references (+pdf) of the many scientific research articles that would better inform this page 

message: NCBI lists cheetahs being in Acinonyx, a sister clade to Felinae. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?mode=Tree&id=32536&lvl=3&lin=f&keep=1&srchmode=1&unlock Aredridel (talk) 15:52, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The ASM's MDD lists it in Felinae. https://www.mammaldiversity.org/explore.html#genus=Acinonyx&species=jubatus&id=1005979 We generally follow the IUCN and ASM. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: IUCN lists it in Acinonyx: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/219/124366642#taxonomy 172.56.193.150 (talk) 16:26, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, doh, no, that's genus not subfamily. IUCN doesn't list it (at least in the red list) Aredridel (talk) 16:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  The NCBI does place Acinonyx in Acinonychinae, which reflects early classifications separating the cheetah from the other cats based on its "non-retractible" claws. This classification fell out of favour on morphological grounds (the claws are sort of retractible after all) before molecular data showed the cheetah to be more closely related to the puma and jaguarundi. The NCBI disclaimer saying "The NCBI taxonomy database is not an authoritative source for nomenclature or classification" is pertinent here. —  Jts1882 | talk  17:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy incorrect? 

message: About my last edit:
That is exactly what I said.
I don't think I expressed it in the best way. Correct?
The length of a cheetah's femur in relation to body mass is 87 mm/kg⅓. That of a greyhound is 69 mm/kg⅓.
In addition, the diameter of the midshaft of cheetah bones is larger than that of greyhounds relative to the length of the bone.
For example, in cheetahs, the diameter equals 8.07 % of the femur length, and 7.53 % of the femur length in greyhounds.
The diameter equals 7.27 % of the tibia length in cheetahs, and 7.02 % in greyhounds.
(Relative diameters are personal calculations from length and diameter averages also made by me; See Hudson 2011).
There is a popular belief that cheetahs are too fragile, but this is not so true.
There are more graceful animals out there.
An animal that can accelerate quickly (0-97 Km/h in less than 3 seconds), needs strong limb bones. Don't you think so?
Also, cheetahs seem to have a more elongated calcaneus than greyhounds which would help them to generate more torque on the ankle joint.
LeandroPucha (talk) 19:19, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cheetah limb bones robustness 

message: their habit 207.89.46.249 (talk) 14:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the article: Cheetah#Distribution_and_habitat. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  where do cheetahs live 

message: Map of India has severe inaccuracies and seems to have been done with mala fide intentions. Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab and Aksai Chin which are inalienable and integral part of India as held by Govt. of India, are shown either as parts of Pakistan and China or marked as separate territories. 
Even if the map is drawn keeping in mind UN disputed territories resolution, disputed territories of Pakistan occupied Kashmir and Aksai chin should have also been marked separately, which isnt the case.
Also Punjab state of India which clearly isnt disputed by any other UN member is marked as a separate country/territory which is highly objectionable. Kindly take note of it and revise the map Mohitkumar0121210 (talk) 19:22, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are asking on the wrong article. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not the wrong article, map of cheetah habitat clearly shows India on the right. The distortion of the map is clearly visible and needs a rectification Mohitkumar0121210 (talk) 02:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I too thought that you asked on the wrong page. But since you insist, just go ahead + change the map yourself. Then we can decide whether your changes are acceptable. – BhagyaMani (talk) 04:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've replace the range map with a cropped version of the same image that avoids the issue. —  Jts1882 | talk  06:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: well okay, since you've cropped it out, I think it doesnt need complete replacement anymore. Its acceptable for now but could require India's addition in the map in future since cheetah population in India has reached 26 after reintroduction from Africa Mohitkumar0121210 (talk) 07:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect map of India 

message: The species of the cheetah is not considered a large cat since it cannot roar. I request we change the page to say that cheetahs are considered small cats but are about the same size as felines considered as large cats. Thanks you 2601:80:477F:82F0:AD97:6C0E:7435:C972 (talk) 14:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 14:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2024