Jump to content

Talk:Leatherback sea turtle: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by 24.190.42.250 (talk) to last version by Denisarona
No edit summary
Line 45: Line 45:


Anyway, maybe [[User:Prof._Mc]] can drop by and explain why he thought my edits were meant to "lighten up" the article. My guess is that it was an automatic anti-vandal response since it was an edit from an IP address and it was only 2 words that changed. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/192.0.202.177|192.0.202.177]] ([[User talk:192.0.202.177|talk]]) 20:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Anyway, maybe [[User:Prof._Mc]] can drop by and explain why he thought my edits were meant to "lighten up" the article. My guess is that it was an automatic anti-vandal response since it was an edit from an IP address and it was only 2 words that changed. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/192.0.202.177|192.0.202.177]] ([[User talk:192.0.202.177|talk]]) 20:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

nonononnonnonononononnonnoonononononononnononononoonnonononononoononno

Revision as of 15:21, 13 May 2015

Template:Vital article

Size

This article says that leatherbacks are the 4th largest reptile after 3 crocodillians, yet komodo dragons (which are lizards) can be a good 3 feet longer, then there are snakes like anacondas as well which can be six feet longer. I get the impression that its supposed to be the 4th heaviest reptile perhaps? "Largest" is a little vague. 123.243.215.92 (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added a link to SWOT Report, volume 1. This is a yearly publication and volume one focuses on the leatherback nesting beaches of the world, along with many articles about loggerhead natural history, behavior and conservation. Also includes information relating to other species of sea turtles, but the information is heavily leatherbacks. All products, publications and information produced by SWOT is to be freely used and distributed and is meant to be a public outreach, awareness and education tool for conservation of sea turtles. c 2007 (UTC)

Life expectancy

Is anything known about life expectancy in this species? or turtles in general? Autochthony wrote: 1433 Z 2012 January 04. 109.154.29.239 (talk) 14:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually not. The speculation is just that, and states 50 years or more. (That's all the data we have. Maybe in another 50 years it will say "100 years or more." ) But the article would be better if it addressed that lack of knowledge. Think I'll add it now. 66.87.0.98 (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed videos

I deleted two videos from the Life History (Predation) section as they purported to be of leatherback hatchlings emerging from a nest, and a hatchling running for the sea. In fact neither video was of leatherbacks; they both showed cheloniid hatchlings.Gleedowengleedowen (talk) 19:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two odd sentences in physiology paragraph

There are two sentences in here that don't make any sense. I edited them, but my edits were reverted, so I figured I'd post them here and someone more legit could take a look.

"high body temperatures using metabolically generated cold" - You can metabolically generate HEAT, but you can't metabolically generate COLD, which is simply the absence of heat. Also, it doesn't make sense that you'd generate high body temperatures by generating cold. Especially given that it goes on to talk about how the turtle keeps warm by swimming and hunting a lot and staying active, it seems that it would be generating heat. This sentence struck me as someone making a sly vandalism edit in the long-past.

"...recorded diving to depths as small as 1,280 metres (4,200 ft)..." - This just struck me as very odd wording. In context, its talking about the deep/large/great depths that the turtle can dive to, but then it uses "small" to describe the turtle's maximum recorded depth.

Anyway, maybe User:Prof._Mc can drop by and explain why he thought my edits were meant to "lighten up" the article. My guess is that it was an automatic anti-vandal response since it was an edit from an IP address and it was only 2 words that changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.0.202.177 (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

nonononnonnonononononnonnoonononononononnononononoonnonononononoononno