Talk:Least weasel

Revisions

As a project for ENGL202C at the Pennsylvania State University, I have researched this topic using books and online resources. I have made corrections, re-wrote the introduction section, and added citations for the least weasel. I attempted to make all needed revisions that are discussed in this discussion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Racecar55 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Are they nocturnal?

Not the smallest mammalian carnivore, either.

The smallest Mammal, the Etruscan Shrew, is a carnivore, and it's only a fraction the size of any mustelid. I've changed the page to reflect this.

BTW, if you're going to say that a creature is the smallest or largest anything, you should mention its actual size somewhere in the article.

If you meant "smallest member of the order Carnivora" you should, I think, have written that.

CarlFink 20:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the link for carnivore was pipe-linked to Carnivora not carnivore, it is probable that was what was meant. Dsmdgold 01:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

But wouldn't that make the word "mammalian" in "mammalian carnivore" redundant?CarlFink 15:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Not necessarily; the term "mammalian carnivore" is often used to refer specifically to members of Order Carnivora as opposed to just "carnivore," which is often used to just mean any animal that eats meat, including animals that are not members of Carnivora, and for that matter not even mammals. 75.71.194.124 (talk) 04:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/wildfacts/factfiles/202.shtml The Etruscan pygmy shrew is an insectivore. The least weasel is the smallest carnivore ie. eats meat. To split hairs insectivores are classed under carnvivores but are not true carnivores. This link states it is the smallest carnivore fullstop! which makes sense. It is the smallest animal in the order carnivora and all other animal eating species are not true carnivores [ie are insectivorous] else they would be classed by taxodermy to be in carnivora, by definition. There have not been any discussions about this for a while so i guess i will change it and allow the next person to use thier deiscretion as whether to keep my change. Wuku (talk) 04:40, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Diet and behavior?

What does the Least Weasel eat? it eats or you need to go somewhere else and get this information ' if you will? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.184.142 (talk) 17:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Or perhaps look at the section called "diet". FunkMonk (talk) 14:34, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Weasels in Australia? Huh?

Never seen them or heard of them being over here in Oz. Can't find anything online about them being here, either. With all the discussion that goes on in this country about feral foxes, cats, dogs, rats, mice, rabbits, hares, pigs, buffalos and even camels (not to mention the illegality of importing hamsters and chinchillas), I'm sure information would be easier to find. The closest thing I can locate is a snippet of info on a (probably extinct) colony of ferrets that used to live in Tasmania. However, there is somewhat of a stoat problem in New Zealand.

We also have otters in a couple of our zoos. Metasyntactic D (talk) 11:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Unless they're in zoos or being privately kept as pets, I've not heard of evidence that there's a significant population of wild weasels in Australia. Obviously they wouldn't be native, but haven't heard of feral weasels in Australia existing as an introduced (either intentional or unintentional) species. Perhaps stoats were mistaken for weasels; they are fairly similar animals. 75.71.194.124 (talk) 04:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Subspecies

Somehow the UK has been excluded from the list of subspecies. UK is neither south europe or scandinavia!! so which subspecie is the british weasel? http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/wildfacts/factfiles/202.shtml also the BBC is a very reliable source, and despite not stating what the subspecies are, it states that there are only two. Either way the UK needs to be covered in the listings Wuku (talk) 06:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

talk:Least Weasel/Archive 1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Least weasel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 09:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

• Hi there, I'll review this. FunkMonk (talk) 09:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
• First, the info under subspecies needs sources (including the hidden part). I know the source for all of it is probably included in the first sentence of the section, but every free standing sentence should preferably have a citation following it, just to leave out ambiguity.

I do not have access to detailed descriptions of subspecies. I can find references for synonyms such as this, and for some ranges such as this. Would you like me to add these? As for uncited descriptions, it would seem a pity to remove them when they are probably accurate. I will ask Mariomassone if he has any sources for this information. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it should all be sourced as well as you can. If I let it go now, someone else will probably bring it up in the future. Perhaps Mariomassone should take part in this GAN? FunkMonk (talk) 05:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

He knows about the GAN. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• I find it a bit puzzling that there's only a single photo of a live specimen in the article! Plenty of ok images on Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Mustela_nivalis If room is an issue, I'd replace the drawings and museum specimens.

Better? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:58, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Yep. Perhaps move the Alaskan weasel photo to distribution, and move the subspecies skin to the right? Now it's a bit crammed there. I'll try it, and move the rabbit photo to diet, revert if you disagree. FunkMonk (talk) 05:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• Under subspecies, various sizes are mentioned, with no accompanying measurements. Would it be possible to add some? "Large", "larger than", "medium", etc. means little, when there is nothing to compare to.

Ok. FunkMonk (talk) 05:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

In the "Physical description" section you will see that there is great variability in the size of the least weasel, even the size of subspecies, so I think generalisations are necessary. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

• Some subspecies have no descriptions or ranges in the hidden box, is that because none could be found? Would be nice to make this consistent.

See answer above. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

• Thank you for taking on this review. I have been away for a few days and will get to work tomorrow on the points you raise. The history of the article is that ‎Mariomassone expanded the article back in 2011 and left it in good shape. I have added a bit more information in the last three months, expanded the lead and tidied the article up a bit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I haven't reviewed the entire article yet anyway. Also, you can always change whatever you want in an already fleshed out article, if it is an improvement. FunkMonk (talk) 04:05, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

• I would make a more inclusive "taxonomy and evolution" section, because there is no info about scientific naming and taxonomic history.

I will work on this. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• "(16 to 20 mm (0.6 to 0.8 in))" Why this double parenthesis? You don't use it for any other measurements.

Removed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• The colouring of this individual seems a bit aberrant[1], anything special going on there?

I guess it is one of the Russian subspecies. There seems to be variability in the colour of several subspecies. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• "Predators and competitors" This is here a separate section, but wouldn't it make more sense as a subsection under behaviour/ecology?

Moved. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• Status > Conservation status.

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• Any info on whether some subspecies are more threatened than others?

No, but I have added a little more information. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

• The folkore section seems to be about "weasels" in general. Any indication that these references are especially about this particular species? If not, I'm not sure if it belongs here. I can see that "weasel" is used for the species in the UK, but how do we know that references to "weasels" in for example Greece refer to the least weasel, and why is the name "least weasel" not used for the Indian legends?

In the article Weasel, it states "The English word "weasel" was originally applied to one species of the genus, the European form of the least weasel (Mustela nivalis). This usage is retained in British English." I would think the first two paragraphs would be likely to be about the least weasel. What if I were to remove the last three short paragraphs to the "Cultural meanings" section of the article Weasel? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, either that, or delete it. I assume none of us understand the source languages, so there's no way to really check them properly. FunkMonk (talk) 10:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

• "However, in the Senboku District, especially in Obonai village (生保内村?), they are called "okojo".[39]" This seems so marginal and obscure as to be irrelevant... I'm sure the animal has hundreds of local names, listing one is a bit weird.

If I move the last 3 paragraphs of this section, it will be gone! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Gone. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

• Weasel should be changed to least weasel in the culture section then.

I have done this, but I don't think it is an improvement. If I see a fox or badger I don't say "Look, there's a red fox, and there's a European badger", I just use the unadorned terms "fox" and "badger" because they are the only species present in the UK. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, the thing is, none of the references in the section are about UK myths, and the animal is not called just weasel anywhere else in the article (or in any other country, for that matter, where equivalent words exist, they refer to a broader group, "væsel" where I live). So why only there?

I wouldn't willingly have a culture section in any article I was writing from scratch. I am quite happy to remove the whole In folklore and mythology section (adding it to the Weasel article). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

• I think the article is pretty close, only problem is the lack of citations for the subspecies info, and the missing taxonomy info... FunkMonk (talk) 10:09, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Done a taxonomy paragraph. Rather than have the article fail because of the unreferenced stuff in the subspecies table, I would remove it, but I think that would be a pity. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Not sure what to do... Maybe we could ask someone? FunkMonk (talk) 13:07, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Found some references. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

• How do we know the individual in the taxobox is the Middle European weasel subspecies? The Commons page does not specify this, and it seems this subspecies is not found in the UK? Wouldn't it rather be the Common weasel?

Changed the caption. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

• Perhaps this image shows territoriality better than the small blurry one used now? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mustela_nivalis_%28two,_fighting%29.jpg

Replaced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

• Commons has pictures of a least weasel in Switzerland[2], wouldn't it be the Middle-European weasel? And here's another one in Alaska[3], wouldn't that be the "eskimo" subspecies? FunkMonk (talk) 10:53, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Added the Middle-European image. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

• As for subspecies stuff, I've started this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_nominations#Removing_unsourced.2C_but_useful_information

As it happens, I did some research with JSTOR and have added references to the descriptions of three of the subspecies. Difficult to find though. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

• Alright, all the GA relevant issues have been solved, so I'll pass this. FunkMonk (talk) 13:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Size comparison with potential prey

Hello, I'm from WP:DINO, but I also am interested in other animals. I created this size comparison between a least weasel, European hare, and human hand, mainly because I thought it would be interesting to size up this little guy with his giant (relatively) prey. Do you think that it would be useful for the article? --Slate Weasel (talk) 01:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Map

Distribution map doesn't include areas it's introduced to, also doesn't include New Zealand Quixoticelixer- (talk) 07:59, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Weasels in the Canary Islands?

I'm curious to know where the reference to the least weasel living in the Canary Islands comes from. I've searched Spanish references and all the ones that I have found state that the weasel DOES NOT live in the Canary Islands. 83.58.235.196 (talk) 20:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

It's unsourced, and the only source that does describe the distribution doesn't mention it, so, until further evidence comes along, I think it's right that it be removed. Anaxial (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)