Talk:Liberian mongoose
Latest comment: 5 years ago by 2600:6C48:7006:200:B056:6066:1296:EF0B in topic contradiction
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
contradiction
editIt couldn't have been discovered in 1974 is the authority date is 1958. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
- Based on Animal Info, it seems like the first animal obtained by scientists was in 1974, but that the species was known before that. Eli Falk 16:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
- It still doesn't make sense, as you need a specimen to describe it (well, that can be argued... but of no importance for a species described in 1958). If I remember right, 1974 is the year it was rediscovered (or was it the year the first living individual was seen by scientists?). I don't remember right now, but if I get the time I'll check sources later. Either way, the current text is wrong. • Rabo³ • 07:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
I just checked a few sources, none matching the 1974 year. Seeing that above was started almost 2 years ago, I've deleted the section. If someone can find a ref. marching the year (where it also makes sense), it can always be readded via history.Of course, re-reading the section, emphasis should be placed on complete specimen. I've removed the contradict template, as I think this explains that issue. The article is still unreferenced, though (just writing "Nowak, 1999" doesn't work when not giving the complete ref. further down [... even if I think I know what ref. that is]) • Rabo³ • 07:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
- At least, can we start with a picture of one to help support its very existence? 2600:6C48:7006:200:B056:6066:1296:EF0B (talk) 01:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- It still doesn't make sense, as you need a specimen to describe it (well, that can be argued... but of no importance for a species described in 1958). If I remember right, 1974 is the year it was rediscovered (or was it the year the first living individual was seen by scientists?). I don't remember right now, but if I get the time I'll check sources later. Either way, the current text is wrong. • Rabo³ • 07:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)