Talk:Cape bushbuck

Accuracy disputed

Johnnybirder (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC) I dispute the accuracy of this article. The taxonomic status of the species is far from settled (Plumptre and Wronski 2013; Moodley & Bruford 2007; Moodley et al. 2009; Hassanin et al. 2012). As such, this entry should refer to a subspecies or species group, rather than giving the impression that this is a accepted species.

There are other issues as well. For example, while some local people may call this taxon an Imbabala, this is not the accepted english name. I have now edited this article to "South African bushbuck" as the main name, to mitigate some of the confusion. Unfortunately I could not edit the page title.

References

Plumptre and Wronski 2013. Tragelaphus scriptus BUSHBUCK; pp 163–172 in Kingdon, J. et al. (eds) 2013. Mammals of Africa. Bloomsbury Publishing, London.

Moodley, Y. & Bruford, M. W. 2007. Molecular biogeography: towards an integrated framework for conserving pan-African biodiversity. PLoS One 2 (5): e454.

Moodley, Y., Bruford, M. W., Bleidorn, C., Wronski, T., Apio, A. & Plath, M. 2009. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA data reveals non-monophyly in the bushbuck (Tragelapgus scriptus) complex. Mammalian Biology 74: 418–422.

Hassanin, A., Delsuc, F., Ropiquet, A., Hammer, C., Jansen van Vuuren, B., Matthee, C., Ruiz-Garcia, M., Catzeflis, F., Areskoug, V., Nguyen, T. T. & Couloux, A. 2012. Pattern and timing of diversification of Cetartiodactyla (Mammalia, Laurasiatheria), as revealed by a comprehensive analysis of mitochondrial genomes. Comptes Rendus Biologies 335: 32–50.

Johnnybirder (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Luke Beall (talk) 02:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

It's no secret that the taxonomy of the tragelaphines known as "bushbucks" is a muddled and contested topic (Grubbs and Groves (2011) recognized 8 species and a potential for more). But while a single page detailing a species complex is definitely a possible solution, I feel that recombining both of the existing pages is an unnecessary step, as T. scriptus and T. sylvaticus are already widely accepted as distinct species in most sources. The problem is that more species of bushbuck may exist apart from these two. I'm under the impression that a section noting this and other debated aspects of bushbuck taxonomy to both the "imbabala" and "kewel" pages would be sufficient to solve this for now, until more studies can be published and a broader consensus is reached on the subject.

I do agree that the pages should be renamed to their respective English names.

Johnnybirder, could you supply a source for the name "South Africa bushbuck"? A web search couldn't turn any recorded uses of the name. If you chose it just for clarity's sake, I understand, but I'd wager Cape bushbuck, a decently popular common name, would suffice for now? Feel free to discuss.

Luke Beall (talk) 02:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

In the last chapter in section Taxonomy, I changed "clades" to "species", in accordance with Hussain 2018, and to clarify terminology. Lee E Harding (talk) 16:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Luke, sorry no reference to "South Africa bushbuck". The name was there so I just switched it with the obscure names, which is also causing confusion elsewhere e.g. https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/8586948. I wonder if these pages shouldn't be completely recreated with the correct common names. Of course a rather radical solution, but really mostly a copy-paste job.

Also, do you know how to get wikipedia to send me email alerts on these talks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnybirder (talk • contribs) 15:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

You can activate email notifications for your watchlist pages on your "User preferences" page (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Email_notification for more info). As for the bushbuck pages, they could be moved (renamed) to their respective English common names. However, the nature of this process depends on whether the move can be foreseen as controversial; if so, a move should be formally requested. If not, users have the go-ahead on completing the move on the spot. Whether these moves qualify as controversial, I'm unsure. Theoretically, it shouldn't be, given that their English common names should be favored according to the Manual of Style for alternative names (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Alternative_names), but the debate surrounding the taxonomy might be enough for it to be considered controversial. Let me know what you think. Luke Beall (talk) 03:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bushbuck. 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/20140627000000/http://www.iucnredlist.org to http://www.iucnredlist.org

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:30, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 27 November 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Reasonable nomination, unopposed for over a week. Jenks24 (talk) 06:54, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

---

Imbabala → Cape bushbuck – According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section (alternative names), English common names should be prioritized over non-English names. This is especially relevant in this case, where the non-English name is rarely used internationally in comparison to the English one. Luke Beall (talk) 05:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Masai Bushbuck

My uncle, who did a lot of hunting in Africa, said there was a difference between the Masai Bushbuck and the Cape Bushbuck. Could anyone help me with understanding this difference? Skysong263 (talk) 15:17, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

About the article

The name of this article is still Cape bushbuck, but can somebody change it into "bushbuck"? There's another article called harnessed bushbuck as well. Could somebody move it to the article "bushbuck"? Esagurton (talk) 11:50, 17 July 2022 (UTC)