Talk:Billy (pygmy hippo)

message: These sources were added but without content, so I'm not sure if they actually were used to cite anything in this article.  I don't have access to the sources, but if they corroborate anything in the article, please let me know so we can add them back in. --JayHenry 01:33, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh great, thanks!  I've always wanted to look at one of those studbooks, but unfortunately my library doesn't have any.  I added that source back into the article.  I think it'd be great to mention Billy's studbook number as that will make it easier for other serious zoological researchers to find information on him. --JayHenry 06:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow, that's great information, I added the date of death and the number of children.  I didn't give the month-by-month break down as I figure that's probably more information than most people are interested in!  I saw you asked above about changing the genus name.  Here's the story:  pygmy hippos were actually first classified as Hippopotamus minor, but it was quickly realized that they were quite distinct, and they were given the name Choeropsis liberiensis by Samuel G. Morton.  In 1977, Shirley (S.C.) Coryndon, who studied hippos extensively recognized a lot of similarities between the pygmy hippo and the fossil Hexaprotodon.  She renamed the Pygmy Hippopotamus Hexaprotodon liberiensis and for the most part this became accepted.  Then , in 2005 Jean-Renaud Boisserie, a paleontologist at Berkeley, did an extremely detailed review of fossil hippos using some techniques that weren't available in 1977 and concluded that the pygmy hippopotamus was actually different from the Hexaprotodonts of Asia.  He returned the Pygmy Hippo to its previous name Choeropsis liberiensis.  This only happened two years ago.  I haven't seen it challenged anywhere, but it hasn't been around long enough to return to widespread usage.  Some of the more recent papers I've read have a footnote saying that "in 2005 Boisserie proposed returning the pygmy hippopotamus to Choeropsis" but haven't passed judgment one way or the other yet.  The two relevant papers are below if you are curious!  Thanks again for your help with this research! --JayHenry 16:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Extra sources

message: Billy and Hannah: 1. August 26, 1931, male, died August 27, 1931, killed by mother. 2. August 21, 1932, male died August 22, 1932, killed by mother. 3. April 29, 1933, male, died April 29, 1933, killed by mother. 4. May 8, 1938, female, sent to Cole Bros. Circus April 26, 1939. 5. June 24, 1939, female, prematurely born, died June 25, 1939. 6. February 25, 1940, female, died October 28, 1942. 7. May 9, 1941, female, sent to Philadelphia Zoological Gardens, March 16, 1944. 8. February 1, 1943, female, died February 2, 1943. 9. February 20, 1945, male, sent to Miller Bros. Circus, Jan. 7, 1950. 10. December 21, 1945, female, died Dec. 21, 1945. 11. October 11, 1947, female, died Feb. 11, 1948. 12. March 12, 1950, female, sent to Catskill Game Farm, June 16, 1953. 13. June 13, 1951, male, sent to Catskill Game Farm, June 16, 1953. 14. April 26, 1953, female, died Nov. 8, 1953. 15. June 8, 1954, female, died June 23, 1955. Billy and Matilda: 1. Dec. 13, 1943, male, sent to Fort Worth Zoo. 2. March 15, 1947, female, living at NZP. 3. July 3, 1948, female, living at NZP. 4. Dec. 20, 1949, female, sent to Sydney, Australia, Oct. 18, 1954. 5. April 24, 1952, male, died Oct. 8, 1952. 6. Oct. 2, 1953, female, died Sept. 16, 1954. 7. January 30, 1955, female, sent to John Seago, England, Sept. 7, 1956. 7. March 29, 1956, female, sent to L. Ruhe, New York, May 7, 1957. Matilda and two of her daughters are still living in the National Zoological Park. Billy died on October 11, 1955, and Hannah on March 6, 1958. From Annual Report on The National Zoological Park, Washington, 1959.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.1.195.4 (talk) 16:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, what a find!  By the way: if you're interested in other zoo hippos, Wikipedia has articles on Obaysch and Huberta the hippopotamus.  And as you mentioned Sumatran rhinos... you don't happen to have photos that you took yourself of any of those Sumatran rhinos do you? --JayHenry (talk) 07:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Billy's offspring 

message: This article is on the short side, but I think that's appropriate for an article about a famous zoo animal.  As you can hopefully see from the above sections, we've done a pretty thorough job researching.  Because of the time period, there are no public domain pictures of Billy that I know of, although all pygmy hippos look more or less alike. --JayHenry (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither of these things concern me in the least. GA-class was meant for articles too short to ever be FA, and it's about broadness, not mere length. Also, lack of an image is completely understandable considering the subject matter. I'll post a full review shortly. VanTucky 20:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Note to GA reviewer 

message: This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write.  This is how the article, as of April 27, 2008, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?:  Very well-written for the most part, but I have a coupe questions/comments. First, are the commas a part of the direct quotes in Parenting troubles and Life as a stud? If not, they should go outside the quotation marks. Second, and more importantly, the first sentence of the article is interesting, but it doesn't state the obvious very well, at least to a first time reader like myself. Rather than jumping immediately in to edification on the subject , it's really important to define the article's subject point blank for the reader. If you don't mind, I'd like to take a hack at this myself. Unusual is pretty subjective anyway, who's to say a hippo is more unusual than lion cubs or Lincoln's goats? There were a lot of weird presidential pets, by today's standards. Other than that, it's a great read and in compliance with the Manual of Style.
:2. Factually accurate?:  Almost perfectly cited. I would, however, like to see the sentence, "Coolidge sent the second largest collection of animals of any president after Roosevelt to the zoo..." cited directly if possible. It's a pretty big claim.
:3. Broad in coverage?:  Certainly broad enough, especially considering the rather obscure subject matter.
:4. Neutral point of view?:  Gives fair representation to all significant points of view.
:5. Article stability?  Obviously stable, no edit wars etc.
:6. Images?:  All images that are present have proper source and licensing information.
For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to the hold below rather than within the body of the review. Thank you!
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved.  After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again.  If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice.  Thank you for your work so far. VanTucky 21:10, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to take a stab at that first sentence.  I was trying to avoid saying "Billy the pygmy hippo is a pygmy hippo who" and got stumped.  I agree that it's awkward as written, and we can't start with an awkward sentence.  I also agree that "unusual" is potentially problematic.  I fixed the commas.  I always forget about that rule on Wikipedia.  Also clarified that sourcing about Roosevelt/Coolidge.  Thanks, VT! --JayHenry (talk) 02:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me know what you think about the new first sentence, and thanks very much for the timely work on my other requests, I really appreciate it. VanTucky 03:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, that works perfect!  (Not sure why I never though to just put the pygmy hippo part later in the sentence... oops!) --JayHenry (talk) 03:20, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! I'm promoting the article to GA-class now. Thanks for all your hard work, and congrats! VanTucky 03:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

text: That's fine with me.  I had no idea where to place it.  I saw that while Knut (polar bear) was a GA he was placed under a header by himself called something like "Famous organisms", but I think history is probably better.  Maybe someday there will be enough for their own category (e.g. Jumbo, Clara, Cheeta, Koko, Obaysch, Abada, Leo the Lion, etc.) --JayHenry (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I chose Historical figures - other. Let's fight the good fight against species-ism, animals are people too ;) VanTucky 04:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination on hold

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Billy (pygmy hippo). 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/20071114022909/http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Animals/AfricanSavanna/factpygmyhippo.cfm to http://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/africansavanna/factpygmyhippo.cfm
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) 04:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified