Reindeer was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. stateofAlaska on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Text and/or other creative content from Reindeer was copied or moved into Reindeer distribution with this edit on February 2, 2020. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.
The contents of the Caribou page were merged into Reindeer on October 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.
Just popping in to point out this oddity: The section called "description" is almost entirely dedicated to distribution and habitat. Only the first and last paragraphs - which are also the smallest paragraphs - offer any descriptive information at all, and the descriptive info that it does offer is very cursory. I would expect to see detailed information about size, weight, coloration, differences between sexes, antler size and appearance, descriptions of juveniles, etc. Not 3 nomenclature-heavy paragraphs about where all the subspecies live.
"Wild reindeer "may well be the species of single greatest importance in the entire anthropological literature on hunting.""
This seems a rather extraordinary statement given the comparative ranges of reindeer and humans: most human hunters live in places without reindeer. Certainly it would seem to need a lot more justification.
I have altered it to much closer to what the reference of the statement says where it comes up on mouse-over, i.e. "Wild reindeer have long been an important resource for people inhabiting the same range."
However, I haven't got access to the article referenced - someone who has might well be able to do better :-)
Fortunately, the relevant section is available on JStor, although the full paper is not. Here's the quote:
In North America and Eurasia the species had long been an important resource - in many areas the most important resource - for peoples inhabiting the northern boreal forests and tundra regions. ... The caribou/wild reindeer is thus an animal that has been a major resource for humans throughout a tremendous geographic area and across a time span of tens of thousands of years. It may well be the species of single greatest importance in the entire anthropological literature on hunting.
There is no further justification for this statement on the opening page and, judging from the topic of the paper, probably not elsewhere within it; it's just the preamble. Anaxial (talk) 13:09, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thanks. I could only get the abstract up.
It has to be admitted that it is technically a correct and relevant quote from a scientific paper.
However, it still seems to me to be an extraordinary claim to make without any sort of justification or reference, and I agree that the subject of the paper does suggest that it is a random preamble statement rather than one that the paper justifies at length.
Moreover, while the statement that the reindeer is an important resource matters to the subject of the article, the statement that it is the single most important species in anthropological literature on hunting is hardly a necessary one.
Unless someone with access to the full paper or, preferably, to a paper actually on the relative importance of different species in the entire anthropological literature objects, or unless someone has some other argument for restating it, I'd suggest that the quote remains removed, and I have tidied up the repetition in the relevant paragraph on this basis.
I am currently working on trying to de-orphan the article, Lichenase, and the enzyme appears in the article in the section "Ecology", subsection "Diet", first paragraph. Please link the term to the page. I am unable to do this because I have 451 edits (49 to go!), and can only edit the article once I reach 500 edits. Please do this soon.
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Done Anaxial (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. UtherSRG (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
