Talk:Red panda

Confusing

This line near the beginning: "and a waddling gait due to its shorter front legs, being slightly larger than a domestic cat". Are its front legs shorter than its rear legs, but larger than a domestic cats legs? Odd. Or, its front legs shorter than its rear legs. Also, it's larger than a domestic cat. How much larger? Flight Risk (talk) 03:59, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Pristinailurus

Why does the well-known fossil ailurid Pristinailurus redirect here when it had (rightfully) its own page in the past? These taxa differ at a generic level; redirecting Pristinailurus to Ailurus makes as much sense as redirecting Pan to Homo. The fossil genus is known from fairly complete remains and differs significantly in terms of size, dentition, and geographic origin. It is at least as distinct and notable an organism as any of thousands of fossil genera that Wikipedia has granted their own page.70.122.86.238 (talk) 20:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, why? It's no less notable than any other fossil mammal. I though page deletions had to be justified, but how would you justify removing a page when it's one of thousands that have been otherwise deemed notable? Sumanuil (talk) 03:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Successes

I would like to remove the "Successes in red panda breeding list." This was admittedly the reason I started working on this article (someone had listed twins, and my zoo had just had triplets), but not only can't we keep such a list updated, but it is really the job of the studbook to do so, not an encyclopedia article. Now someone has listed a single birth, which I do not believe is notable at all. I would replace the list with something like "There have been triplet(citations) and even quaduplet(citation) births in captivity." This would explicitly limit it to the larger litters. The last item on list (release back to the wild) would just be another sentence. Donlammers (talk) 10:06, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your reasoning about this. Per WP:LISTS another reason to remove it would be that, given time, it just becomes a long list of births from all over the world. Some not really that notable in the long run. Limiting it to larger litters is a good idea. Conversely, if others want to keep it, we could split it off into its own article with a link from this main one. MarnetteD | Talk 14:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

First Known Written Record

According to http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1992/2/redpandasfirecat.cfm the first known written record is in a 13th century Chinese scroll. Does anyone have any more information on this? Innocenceisdeath (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't, and not through lack of trying. Notice that he does not state his source, nor does he even mention what document this was in. I found one reference elsewhere to some scroll that allegedly showed a "picture," but again with no further information. I decided at the time to leave the reference, but if you think this is not good enough documentation we can rewrite that section. Donlammers (talk) 16:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I would be interested in seeing this other reference if you still know where it is. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 11:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought that I saw a really bad photo of a "scroll" somewhere in my original searches. I can't find it now. Everything I have found seems to point back to the article in question (most often a direct copy) Or to a 1983 article by the same writer (Roberts, M.: The red panda: its history and fragile hold on the future. Your Cincinnati Zoo News Spring/Summer 1983, pp. 1-5.). So far I have not been able to find a copy of the 1983 article. Donlammers (talk) 02:51, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Great, I shall do my best to hunt down this publication. I've found another reference to it that contains more information. I shall update the Wikipedia article accordingly.Innocenceisdeath (talk) 17:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Notice that Featured Picture is nominated for delisting

There's a featured picture of this species that is currently not used in the body of the article. Unfortunately, the delisting process of FPs currently does not notify related articles and wikiprojects to sufficient extent to allow sensible remedies to be made, so its delist nomination at Featured Picture Candidates is now somewhat advanced. Preliminary opinions suggest that it is still the best image of the species on image quality grounds, and I'm confident it would be kept as an FP if found a reasonably prominent and useful place in this article. Feel free to contact me or go to its nomination on the FPC page if you have any questions or would like to express an opinion on the nomination. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

link to nomination

Caps in the article

What is the current feeling about the capitalisation of red panda throughout the article? It has just been changed from 'red panda' to 'Red panda'. I feel that it shouldn't receive any special capitalisation when merely mentioned throughout the article. But if the consensus is otherwise then I won't change it back.Innocenceisdeath (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I almost always favor less capitalization where there is a choice. I think it should be "Red panda" in the title and the top of the infobox, but in running text it should be "red panda." Donlammers (talk) 02:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I concur with Innocenceisdeath and Donlammers in the idea that "red" should only be capitalized in the title and infobox. One of the limitations of wikipedia's programming code is that a capital letter is required at for an article title. That causes the occasional anomaly error as in the page for Lindsay Anderson's film if... which has to have a capital "I" to exist as an article but doesn't need one otherwise. MarnetteD | Talk 02:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

caps creeping back in

having read the discussions of recent years, re: cap'ing red panda or not, I do understand that the caps creep back in. Though I realize that even among zoologists and authors of scientific articles, this issue has not been resolved — some cap Red throughout, some don't, I favor cap'ing the name of a species, i.e. using Red panda, because red is not an adjective, but part of a name. Right now, it looks like the use of Red Panda exceeds the use of red panda in the article's sections. However, no matter what the consensus is, let's make it consistent throughout the article. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't agree about "Red panda". If the name is capitalized, it should be "Red Panda" (yes, I know this is often an emotional argument). However, I do agree that we need to be consistent. I made two bad assumptions when the article was moved from "Red Panda" to "Red panda." I assumed that the person making the move had gone through and made all "Red Panda" => "Red panda." Then I assumed that subsequent editors also went through the entire article for "Red panda" => "red panda". Neither was true, of course. I just went through the entire article and found "Red Panda," "Red panda," and "red panda" all in use. I'm not sure I got everything correct. However, my goal was to leave case alone when it was in article titles and quotes, use "Red panda" at the start of sentences, and use "red panda" in running text. If you spot inconsistencies, please feel free to fix them. Donlammers (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Archiving

I have archived some of the threads, and collapsed the three big sections that we seem to come back to frequently. These should probably somehow be on separate pages, but I haven't figured out the best way to handle that yet. Hopefully nobody objects. Donlammers (talk) 21:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

As a suggestion please take a look at what we did on the Talk:Oscar Wilde page archive. We took one specific archive and named it for the discussions that came up the most often. You don't necessarily need to date it the way someone did there (I created it without dates to allow future archiving of the same subject but that was changed somewhere along the line.) As I say this is just one suggestion and other ideas are welcome. MarnetteD | Talk 23:26, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to MarnetteD for the suggestion. I did a bit of a variation on the Oscar Wilde article and kept the unnumbered archives separate from the numbered archives. I hope nobody objects. Remember that if you are starting a new thread on any of these discussions, it should be on the main talk page, and will be moved into the appropriate archive when it's been concluded. I am not setting up any auto-archiving at this time because some discussions take a while and there isn't enough activity that I can't keep up now that I have the system set up. Donlammers (talk) 13:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Evolutionary History

"The Red Panda did not evolve, but was created on day six of creation with all other land animals." Seriously? If you're going to include this segment, why fill it with just this? Someone was being cute, also known as being a jackass. -- (xidoraven)99.71.191.229 (talk) 13:57, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

The last sentence in the statement

There is no conclusive source for the origin of the anglicized word "panda." .. The words are usually claimed to be from Nepali language. However, none of these words appear in modern Nepali-English dictionaries, and there are no other primary sources to substantiate these conflicting claims.

is not convincing. When Hardwicke encountered red pandas in the mid-hills of Nepal 190 years ago, the local people did not speak the same Nepali as of today, and most likely not even Nepali, but the language of their ethnic group — be it Tamang, Gurung, Rai or Limbu or local dialects thereof that still today vary from one valley to the next. However, the Nepali word pandā or paṇḍā, meaning clever, skilful, manly or a similarly pronounced one could as well have been used by local people at the time to describe the climbing and other abilities of red pandas. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 21:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the sentence shown is not convincing, for the very reasons that BhagyaMani speculates. However, that is just speculation. Unfortunately, Hardwicke seems to have wanted to name it "Wah," and (at least in documents I've seen) does not claim anything about the origin of the word "Panda". I cannot speak to the "Nepali word "panda", as I don't speak Nepali and did not see any such word in modern dictionaries. If you have sources that will substantiate your claims, then we should change the conclusion and cite it properly. However, your assertions by themselves (including the claimed meaning of the word pandā or paṇḍā) are no more valid than anyone else's unless they can be cited from reliable sources. If you can cite it, go for it! -- I never found the evidence, but then I'm not a linguist, let alone an expert on the area. Donlammers (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Have a look at this source : for paṇḍā But even if this source is cited, it still remains questionable whether this is a conclusive source for the origin of the anglicized word "panda", and is as much speculation as stating that there is none, and as much as stating that the name is anglicized, keeping in mind that Cuvier was French. Would love to read his original description to see whether he gives an explanation the way Schreber did when citing local names of species he described. Alas, couldn't yet find a digitized version of his text. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 01:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

"as much as stating that the name is anglicized": good point -- I eliminated this. I looked for Cuvier's description as well, and could not find it (this does not mean it doesn't exist -- only that my search skills aren't up to finding it). None of the articles I saw lists "pandā" as the word from which "panda" was derived (though it seems to make more sense than the other speculations). Unfortunately, I agree that this probably can't be called "conclusive", though we could list it as another possibility. It would sure be nice if one of the "experts" had made that particular speculation. Donlammers (talk) 02:49, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Having read Hardwicke's text, I decided to revise and cut this part re: origin of word panda:

The words are usually claimed to be from Nepali language. However, none of these words appear in modern Nepali-English dictionaries, and there are no other primary sources to substantiate these conflicting claims.

This at least for the time being, because this is still speculation. There are many more languages spoken in the Himalayas, in particular in the hills, some of which have little in common with Nepali, see also Himalayan Languages Project. Interesting, however, is that Hardwicke refers to the local name Chitwa, which is the Nepali word for leopard, but can also mean a spotted cat such as clouded leopard. But since he does not refer to a local name that implies eater of bamboo, I keep on wondering why Cuvier came to use the name panda, and who (from where) supplied him with the specimen he described. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, most claims I saw did say "Nepali", not "himalayan" (which is one reason I never expanded the search). In any case, the origin is confused, and I have not found anything saying why Cuvier called it panda. I suspect the information about the specimen would be explicit in his text, which I have not seen yet. The only copies I've found in library catalogs are thousands of miles away from me, and I have not found a digitized copy. Donlammers (talk) 17:16, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I posted a note in the French red panda article talk page. Lets wait and see whether anyone replies. So far I have found out that it was Alfred Duvaucel who had sent him a specimen from the mountains north of India — a fact that at least indicates that Duvaucel did not necessarily obtain it from Nepal. He spent some time around Calcutta, but at the time it was a long long way to reach the Nepali mid-hills from there. So it's likely, that he received it from some place closer by and more easily accessible such as Darjeeling or Sikkim. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I have a digital copy of Cuvier's text. I shall upload it as soon as I can. I can confirm that yes Alfred Duvaucel sent him the specimen, the text does not say that the red panda came from the mountains north of India, just that it is of East Indian decent. If you have another text that states this though I would love to see it. Cuvier's description of the red panda is quite scientific for the most part, but at the end of the text he says I propose the generic name for this Panda one of Ailurus, because of its external resemblance with the Cat, and the specific name of fulgens, because of its brilliant colors. I will get provide you with the full text shortly. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 10:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Way to go! I'm glad someone is better at finding this stuff than I am. Donlammers (talk) 13:15, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

How great ! Am looking forward to read it as well. For the statement "from the mountains north of India" — read what his brother Georges Cuvier has published in 1829: book preview page 138: Le Panda éclatant. I referenced this in the article yesterday. "of East Indian descent" is not contradictory to "from the mountains north of India". Today, there are at least 8 protected areas in India's northeast with red panda populations. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 14:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Here it is Histoire Naturelle des Mammifères I hope this is good enough. Apologies for not being able to upload the original scans (which include a great illustration), but the person who made the scans is claiming copyright over them and won't let me publish them without a hefty fee. Personally, after reading through UK copyright law briefly, I don't believe their claims can be substantiated. However, until I can be certain I do not want to take this risk. The scans are of a very high quality too; special apparatus had to be used to capture them as the book is so large. I hope this is adequate, I'll try and dig out a page reference later. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. This confirms the reasoning for the taxonomic name, but unfortunately doesn't say anything about where "panda" came from. I think the fact that he calls it "panda" without question (unless I'm missing something from the Google-translated French) implies that the animal was given to him as "panda" by A. Duvaucel. This means that the specimen was probably presented to Duvaucel as "panda" (or something similar). Unfortunately, since the exact origin of the specimen and the number of people who handled it are unknown, this leaves us with a pretty big gap -- we don't know how many "translations" there were between the actual source of the specimen and its receipt by Duvaucel. Sorry, I'm back to speculating again. Donlammers (talk) 11:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow - how wonderful that this is resurrected! Although we still don't know the origin of the word "panda" we know that

• the fur, jaws and paws of the specimen were not from Nepal, which implies that the word is not exactly a Nepali word, but with high probability of a different Himalayan language;
• Cuvier giving a detailed account about the teeth described it as a typical carnivore, which means he didn't have a clue about the panda's dietary habits as a bamboo eater.

Therefore, I still doubt that the name is reminiscent of bamboo, which in both Hindi and Nepali is "baans" (see in Hindi ; see in Nepali scroll a bit down), in both languages pronounced as a nasal. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 18:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, but did Cuvier understand these other languages? If not, then if Donlammers is correct in that he was just told it was called Panda when it was presented to him, then the fact that the name gave implication to its dietary habits in another language wouldn't affect his reasoning regarding the teeth. So the fact that Cuvier didn't know about its dietary habits from the name may not help. However, I do also have doubts that the name stems from bamboo. There is just a lot of speculation at the moment. Your reasoning that it may stem from a different Himalayan language is good though and should definitely be investigated. I am working on uploading that actual scans. I am going to talk to someone regarding the matter tomorrow, hopefully they can help clear things up. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Good point ! Cuvier certainly did not understand any of the Himalayan languages. But since I enjoy this conversation, I have one more speculation to add : in Nepali language, there is a rarely used word for "little bear" or "bear cub" pauna. Given the similarities of Indo-Aryan languages, I think it very likely that the person who brought the animal to Duvaucel used a similar pronounced word in his native language meaning "small bear". The big bear of course is bhalu, i.e. the sloth and Asian black bear. Unfortunately, there are still many Himalayan languages that are not very well documented. Anyway : am looking forward to more "diggings" -- BhagyaMani (talk) 20:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Somewhere along the line my original sense has gotten messed up about "Firefox". There are a bunch of English sources that claim that Firefox is an English trtanslation. However, there is no evidence to support this that I could find. The Chinese do NOT call it firefox, they call it little cat bear. This misrepresentation is all over the place, including in several zoos I have visited. Th original point was that although we in the English world claim this (and there are plenty of citations), we seem to have forgotten to tell the Chinese (as evidenced by the dictionaries). I have found no evidence whatsoever that the Chinese call the animal "Firefox". I love the name, but I think this is urban myth, and my original paragraph stated that. Donlammers (talk) 00:03, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Your findings about the Chinese word meaning "little cat bear" or "bear cat" concord with its name in the few Himalayan languages I came across, which refer to the species as a kind of bear rather than a fox. Ergo, all these various ethnic groups of the Himalayas have a similar perception of the species. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

What is our earliest current source for the name "firefox"? I have a feeling that the introduction of the web browser has altered the spelling, and that originally it would have been spelt "fire fox", rather than "firefox". Innocenceisdeath (talk) 18:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

A better question would be, how many sources before the browser's release in 2004 were spelt "firefox" and how many were spelt "fire fox". None of the other names it is given that are comprised of two words are spelt without a space. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

All of the sources in the article show it as "firefox." The only one I can easily verify as being "before the browser" is the IUCN "Racoons and Their Relatives" pamphlet, which I have a copy of. It was published in 1995 (the browser came out in 2004), and spells it "firefox." The other refs are web sites, so they could have easily changed since the browser was introduced (though some of them may not have been around yet then). In 1992, Roberts (citation #25) calls it the "Fire Cat" (two words), but only in the title, and without trying to attribute it. The Firefox (disambiguation) page on WP (which I'd never looked at before) states it as fact that it's from Chinese, and can also mean "Red Fox" (this is also not supported by the dictionaries I found). So 1995 is the earliest I have found reference to the name so far, and it's a single word. Donlammers (talk) 02:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Can anyone find a decent source for the translation of the Nepali word panjā? Innocenceisdeath (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I have a reference now, and have updated the article, but it would still be good to cite another source too. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 19:50, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't doubt your source, but doubt that the word Nigálya originates from a Nepali word meaning bamboo. In Nepali language, the word for bamboo is बाँस् bã̄s with quite a few names for the different known bamboo species and their uses, see this dictionary: nos. 20 to 25. Nigálya may however be a word from a language that is spoken in Nepal; there are umpteen ethnic groups living in the country, each with their own language, most of which are only spoken but not written languages. See also ref no. 64 stating that the Sherpas call the species ye niglva ponva; they speak Bhotia. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Nigalo is also a word for bamboo, see here. Panja is here. I understand and share your concerns, if you feel it isn't clear enough that what I have added is still speculative, please alter it. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 21:23, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

There you are: the word for this particular species of bamboo Arundinaria intermedia निङालो niṅālo also means kind of small leopard' (= n˚ cituwā), the cat-bear, see nos. 2 and 3 of your 1st link. This is the same cituwā that Hardwicke referred to in his description of 1821. Sherpas derived many words from Nepali, so that it is likely that in Bhotia, the word niṅālo was pronounced slightly different with the ending -o more like an -a, transliterated by Shrestha, T. K. (2003) as niglva. Concerning the word पौँजा paũjā (no. 4 of your 2nd link) meaning paw of an animal, this is not really similar to the word pónya: the j in paũjā is pronounced like the j in the English words jet or joy, whereas the y in pónya is pronounced like the y in yes or yard or yellow. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 23:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I added this as it gave the reasoning behind the previously unjustified translation to bamboo-footed. It is a stretch from nigalya ponya to these other Nepalese words and I do feel that it is unlikely that this is the origin of the name. This said, the links I have given do support the definition of nigalo and ponja. In my first link, if you look at item 2, nĩgālo is clearly listed as a synonym to niṅālo, which can mean a partic. kind of small bamboo. In my second link, if you look at item 1, panjā is clearly listed as a synonym to the word paja, which can mean the toes, the ball of the foot, claws. I myself am not making the link to these words, the publication which I am referencing gives these as the reasoning behind the 'bamboo-footed' theory, and this other site seems to support the definitions of the individual words. The definition that you also looked at for ninalo is quite interesting as it defines it as being a name for a kind of small leopard, the cat-bear. Cat-bear is a synonym for red panda, I can't find anything on it being another name for a leopard though. Feel free to remove this addition to the article, but I felt it would be good to put why it is thought by some to mean 'bamboo-footed' Innocenceisdeath (talk) 00:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, you two are WAY over my level on this one. I am going to just sit back and enjoy the discussion. Donlammers (talk) 01:45, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Right you are, Donlammers, to sit back and enjoy!
Innocenceisdeath wrote that he 'can't find anything on it being another name for a leopard though': the name Chitwa that Hardwicke referred to in his description of 1821 is pronounced the same way as cituwā in the explanation of निङालो niṅālo in Turner's dictionary; the former spelling is 'anglicized', the latter is transliterated correctly. Anyhow, we are slowly getting there. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 02:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I meant that I cannot find any other instances where a leopard is referred to as a cat-bear, not that I couldn't find where it was referred to as a cituwā Innocenceisdeath (talk) 11:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh, wow, you'll have to excuse me I am being ignorant. The cituwā is and always was the red panda of course. Does this not mean that this dictionary indicates निङालो niṅālo is are actually also a name for the red panda? Innocenceisdeath (talk) 11:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Chitwa or चितुवा cituwā is not only a name for the red panda, but is also a word for leopard and any other spotted cat such as a leopard cat and a clouded leopard. see here The word refers much more to the animal being spotted or with a fur of more than two colors versus e.g. a jungle cat, which is ban biralo = literally translated forest cat, jungle cat. To bring this to the point: all spotted cats are called chitwa; a leopard being a big spotted cat is more specifically called chitwa bagh if needed to clarify which of the spotted cats is meant, with bagh referring to a big cat, like the tiger. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Etymology 2

Re: "Nigálya pónya,[67] nyala ponga,[citation needed] and poonya[citation needed] are possible sources, and are said to mean eater of bamboo.[citation needed]" I started looking for "nyala ponya" related to red panda on the Web, and most of the hits seem to be old copies of this article -- except maybe the original place I think I had cited which, I think, was here: http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/proper_pandas.php. I didn't just cite this article because I think it would be better if we could find whatever source he quotes. I copied his refs that we don't already have below. I just ordered the two books used, but I do not have access to the journals without payment (more for one article than I just paid for both books). I hate to be cheap, but if someone has access to the articles, they may be of some use, either with these citations or with others.

• Hodgson, B. H. 1847. On the cat-toed subplantigrades of the sub-Himalayas. Journal of the Asiatic Society 16, 1113-1129.
• Laidler, K. & Laidler, L. 1992. Pandas: Giants of the Bamboo Forest. BBC Books, London.
• Li, M., Wei, F., Goossens, B., Feng, Z., Tamate, H. D., Bruford, M. W. & Funk, S. M. 2005. Mitochondrial phylogeography and subspecific variation in the red panda (Ailurus fulgens): implications for conservation. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 36, 78-89.
• Macdonald, D. W. 1992. The Velvet Claw: a Natural History of the Carnivores. BBC Books, London.

I am almost certain that I have read Hodgson's definitive text before, but I cannot find it. I do believe that the only variation of those names he gives is Nigálya pónya, but obviously this is not good enough. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: Hodgson's article -- Vol 16 of the Journal of the Asiatic Society published in 1856 is online here, but his article is not part of this vol. Looks like it should be an earlier vol, 14 or 15. Are you sure the ref is correct ? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:03, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

I believe it was published in the Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, not the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland Innocenceisdeath (talk) 15:18, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Several vols are online here -- BhagyaMani (talk) 15:41, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

This will take a while to sort through. They aren't well labeled, and at least at a quick glance they don't seem to be in any particular order. I lifted the ref from the article, and it didn't state which "Asiatic Society", but I suspect innocenceisdeath is correct in his assumption that it is the Bengal journal. I'll try to poke through a bit at a time to find the correct one, but real life is intruding a lot right now. Donlammers (talk) 03:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Had a look at some of these vols, but favored to follow a different track: reading about the travels of Alfred Duvaucel, see some updates in the resp. article. And came across a note that Hodgson described an animal in the early 1820s from the north of the Himalayas, locally called Ouàh, which he considered to be identical with an animal he received alive in spring 1824. So it may indeed be worthwhile to sort through these vols of the Bengal journal and find his article. However, since it was Duvaucel who sent the specimen to Paris, am more confident to find a reference to panda in writings about him. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Innocenceisdeath: you mentioned that you have a digital copy of Cuvier's first description. Is there any mention in which particular month this was published ?? Am just curious whether this was before April 1825, at which time the obituary of Alfred Duvaucel was published, or later. Meanwhile I think it likely that he required the panda parts that he sent to Paris during his expedition to the mountains of Sylhet, where he went hunting with local people.
Tracking Duvaucel, I found that in the 19th century the French word Panda referred to the Roman goddess of travelers. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 01:10, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Cuvier's description makes up three written pages and one plate on the red panda. It was published in the third volume, I cannot give page numbers as the pages were not numbered and it would have taken a very long time to carefully turn and count each page of this very large, old book. As it is my understanding it was published in 1825, but I cannot be much more specific than that. However, the item on red pandas seems to indicate it was written in June 1825, which is after April 1825, so clearly it was not published until after then. Sadly I am no closer to being able to publish these digital copies online, it is a real shame as I believe this kind of information should be made freely available. Do you mean to say that Duvaucel acquired those parts in his expedition? I believe I have read some articles that indicated the general speculation as to where it is believed Duvaucel acquired these red panda parts. I shall try and find it. Where did you find out about the French word Panda? That is quite interesting. Innocenceisdeath (talk) 12:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

For the French word Panda, name of the goddess of travelers, who was called upon before a difficult journey, see Grand dictionnaire universel du XIXe siècle, 1st column. I thought this interesting too, because of 2 reasons:

• Was wondering whether Cuvier had her in mind when receiving these parts of the unknown animal from Duvaucel, since latest by spring 1824 — when his 2nd article about Duvaucel's journeys was published — he knew that Duvaucel suffered of a jungle fever after returning from Sylhet to Calcutta in December 1821. At the time, Duvaucel had posted letters and sketches from Calcutta but apparently shipped the consignment with his Sylhet collections later, after sorting the material in his 'base camp' at Chandernagore. Cuvier also knew that Duvaucel planned an expedition to Tibet, but did not yet know that he had to cancel this.
• When you look at species first described by French, they usually didn't bother to incorporate local names in their descriptions, but rather 'invented' their own vernacular names. (Still today, they don't like using foreign names and words, by the way.)

Whether Duvaucel acquired those parts or hunted the animal himself, I cannot yet tell. He was an experienced hunter and taxidermist himself, but also locally employed hunters, and brought one guy along from Sumatra, who accompanied him to Sylhet, which at the time was already part of British India. But the mountains, where he went from Sylhet, were not part of British India, so may as well be "the mountains north of India" that Georges Cuvier referred to in his short description of the species of 1829. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 19:22, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

pónya – pajā – paũjā – panda

To my above remarks of 25 Dec I want to add the following:

• These last days, I searched for and screened dozens of old French journals and dictionaries for articles about Duvaucel and accounts of his journeys and collections sent to Paris. The first three articles were published in 1824, some with excerpts of his letters to Cuvier. Later articles published after his death referred to these early ones, basically providing summaries, and still later ones summaries of these summaries. None of these articles provides any record that Duvaucel ever travelled to Nepal to pursue his zoological collections, or that he was in contact with hunters from Nepal. Hence, I suppose it very unlikely that he knew the Nepali words pónya – pajā – paũjā and their meaning, and as much unlikely that Cuvier knew these words, and also that he knew the word panda from a Nepali context. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that Chris Catton’s statement about the origin of the word panda – referred to in the article – is pure speculation.
• Accounted for is that Duvaucel travelled to the Jaintia and Khasi hills, or Cossy hills as the British used to spell this name, an area that was not part of British India in the 1820s, and is part of Meghalaya today. The language spoken there is Khasi, which belongs to a very different language family than Nepali, namely Austro-Asiatic. Possible is that Duvaucel picked up the Khasi name for this strange to him unknown animal, of which he sent the parts to Cuvier. I checked the 100 year old Khasi-English dictionary, which provides words for small bear and big bear, but no word that faintly sounds like panda.

After all my delving among old books, I’m now convinced that Cuvier simply used a French word for the species, with the intention to give an old name - for a Roman goddess - a completely new meaning. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

New source on names

Well, it has been a few years, but it appears that one of the original texts I suggested may contain some useful information (back in 2010) has been digitised by Google and does indeed contain some useful information.

• Hodgson, B. H. 1847. On the cat-toed subplantigrades of the sub-Himalayas. Journal of the Asiatic Society 16, 1113-1129.

http://books.google.com/books?id=iAfgAAAAMAAJ&lpg=PA1113&ots=4SSUYJl6-P&dq=On%20the%20cat-toed%20subplantigrades%20of%20the%20sub-Himalayas&pg=PA1113#v=onepage&q&f=false

If you read through you will find the following quotes relating to the origins, and meanings of some of the names:

The Ailuri feed on fruits, tuberous roots, thick sprouts such as those of the Chinese bamboo,* acorns, beech mast and eggs. * Hence one of their names, viz. Nigálya-pónya.

I feel this quote can be taken to indicate that the name Nigálya pónya refers to the eating of bamboo. If nobody objects to this, I will update the names section of the article to incorporate this citation.

Names and species. — To the Tibetans, Nepaulese, and Sikimites the Ailuri are known by the names Wáh, Oá, Uktónka, Saknam, Thóngwáh and Thó-kyé. Also, Yé and Nigálya pónya. I never heard the name "Panda," nor did I ever see a specimen answering to the description, in point of colour, of the Panda.* Wherefore I think it probable that the Nipaulese and Sikim species may be different from the Panda, and that the latter is a species peculiar to Bhútán. Under this impression and in order to complete my account of the former, I shall add the description of its colour and subjoin a fresh trivial name. Panda or Fulvens of Cuvier is as yet the only recorded species. * Nat. Library, XIII.217, and Pl.17: Zool Journal, ut supra.

This indicates that the name Panda is unlikely to have originated from Nepal, Tibet or Sikim. Can anyone locate the final text referenced?

There is a great illustration also included in the text too: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=iAfgAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1114-IA2&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U0xzD1w4t7kLlPhFoojSxF_lSZKgQ Very similar to the colour edition (also by Hodgson) offered by London's Natural History Museum here: http://piclib.nhm.ac.uk/results.asp?inline=true&image=037028&wwwflag=3&imagepos=3 Innocenceisdeath (talk) 12:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Firefox browser name redux

I support the claim that Mozilla got the name Firefox as a colloquial name of the Red Panda. They explicitly say so on their Brand name FAQ page. "A "Firefox" is another name for the red panda." They quote the BBC as the source. From http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Red_Panda: "Common names: Firefox, Lesser panda"

The BBC could be mistaken and Mozilla could just be propagating that error, but that does not change the fact that Mozilla thinks that "firefox" is a common name for a Red Panda and that the animal on their logo is meant to represent a Red Panda.

Based on this, I am restoring that info. AlanPater (talk) 16:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I am reverting an edit which again claims that the firefox browser was "named after" the red panda. The browser name was picked for other reasons "It's similar to Firebird. It's easy to remember. It sounds good. It's unique. We like it. And we weren't able to find any other project or company even remotely similar to a web browser that uses the same name." When they are asked what a firefox is, they claim that it is another name for the red panda (please see the discussions in etymology/Local names about how true this is). The link on this statement, if you follow it, goes to an article which is a mirror of this (the Wikipedia red panda) article. We can't quote someone who is quoting us... This section does need citations. I thought I had some at one time, and will need to go back and investigate. Donlammers (talk) 03:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

"The Firefox browser is said to have been named after a Chinese name for red panda: 火狐, or "fire fox." However, Mozilla contradicts this in its branding statements, saying: It's similar to Firebird. It's easy to remember. It sounds good. It's unique. We like it. And we weren't able to find any other project or company even remotely similar to a web browser that uses the same name. —Mozilla.org, Why change the name?[53]"

In what way does the statement from Mozilla.org contradict the previous sentence? It does not so the sentence should be amended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.44.11 (talk) 23:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The statement from Mozilla specifically states how the browser was named, and this does not include being named after the red panda. The "speculationr" is that the browser was named after the red panda. Therefore the two say two different things. However, you are correct that the Mozilla statement does not directly "contradict" the previous statement. I have amended the sentence to say that Mozilla claims different motivations. The point of the sentence (if someone can write it better) is that the browser was NOT named after the red panda (we won't mention that Americans seem to have forgotten to tell the Chinese that one of their names for red panda is firefox). Donlammers (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

There are isolated references to "fire foxes" in Chinese litterature before the browser's era, but what is meant by "fire fox" in each context is unclear:

• United States Census Office, Report on population and resources of Alaska at the eleventh census, 1890, United States Government Printing Office, 1893 ("Siberian fire fox", apparently a variety of fox)
• Joseph S. M. Lau, Chih-tsing Hsia, Leo Ou-fan Lee, editors, Modern Chinese Stories and Novellas, 1919-1949, Columbia University Press, 1981
• Peter Stoicheff, The Hall of Mirrors: Drafts & Fragments and the End of Ezra Pound's Cantos, University of Michigan, 1995 (explicitly refers to huo-hu)

However, this one reference explicitly equates red panda with fire fox:

• Robert E. Hood, Safari in the Bronx, Boys' Life, October 1987

And there are more, as this search reveals:

• RED PANDA [...] genus and species Ailurus fulgens ALTERNATIVE NAMES Lesser panda; cat-bear; fox-cat, fire-fox - Maurice Burton, Robert Burton, The International Wildlife Encyclopedia, Volume 1, 1970
• The creature is known as the fire fox, the red, or lesser, panda. To many a connoisseur of animal pattern and form, the little red panda (Ailurus fulgens) is one of the most beautiful of all animals in nature's kingdom. - Biology Digest, Volume 9, 1982
• For nearly half a century after it was named, the red panda was the panda. Then, in 1869, Père Armand David, [...] some given by European naturalists — shining panda, red cat bear, Himalayan raccoon, and fire fox - Dorcas MacClintock, Red Pandas: A Natural History, 1988
• Also known as the bear cat and fire fox, the nocturnal red panda is an excellent climber [...] - National Geographic Society (U.S.), National Geographic, Volume 173, 1988
• Europeans in the Orient soon found the red panda in China as well as Nepal. There its name was hun-ho, "fire fox," or hsiung maou, "bear cat." Several other names would be added from different areas over the years [...] - Virginia C. Holmgren, Raccoons: in folklore, history & today's backyards, 1990
• The lesser, or red panda lives as [...] The Chinese name Hon-ho (fire fox) refers to the shiny red color of the animal's fur. - Bernhard Grzimek, Grzimek's Encyclopedia of Mammals, Volume 3, 1990
• The alternative Chinese name of fire fox seems particularly apt when the lesser panda's reddish back is glimpsed as it weaves its way [...] - Heather Angel, Pandas, 1998

Side note: The China Journal, Volume 20, 1934, states "The Japanese call the phosphorescent lights arising from decaying fish and vegetable matter the fire-fox."

Urhixidur (talk) 16:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Add the information "Firefox Cubs"

Since Mozilla Corporation is currently putting the hyperlink up to view live feeds of "Firefox" cubs, why not anyone put the information about it in the wiki yet? 99.99.235.159 (talk) 09:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

The link is not significant unless the name of the browser and the animal are related (for instance, it would not be significant if I put it on my web site), and by their own statements the browser is not named after the red panda (this is cited in the article). I suppose we could say something like "Although the Firefox browser was not named after the red panda (which we can cite), and the logo is a red fox (which we can also cite), Firefox seems to be commercializing on the current popularity of the red panda by claiming that Firefox=red panda and showing cute pictures (which we can cite)." Firefox seems to have become a popular name for red panda in the US because it is supposedly the Chinese word for red panda (for which nobody has been able to find any real evidence). I think we should hold off on any additional changes about until we can sort this out with decent support. Discussions on various aspects of naming can be found above and in the archives. Donlammers (talk) 14:28, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

As you say, no one has provided any evidence that the Chinese for red panda played any role. As I noted in Talk:Firefox (disambiguation), the bible has a story of foxes with firebrands tied to their tails, so that seems like a more likely origin. Perchloric (talk) 22:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually I think that the association is obvious enough that it's hard to pin it on a specific origin without a lot more evidence than "here's a ref that predates the other one" (there is no more reliable evidence for biblical origin than Chinese origin -- the bible reference is about foxes, not pandas). There is an example picture at the Denver Zoo that would tempt you to call it firefox without any prior knowledge of such a name (sunset, with the sun behind the animal, making it look like it's on fire). This picture claims Chinese origin (unfortunately without any citations). Back when this article claimed that the origin was Chinese, there were plenty of refs on the Web. When I started tracing them, most turned out to be mirrors or copies of this article, and there are far fewer now that this article doesn't claim the association. Donlammers (talk) 01:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I have rewritten the additions by Perchloric about the live feed to Firefox cubs to (hopefully) separate the current live link information from the browser naming/branding. According to Mozilla, the browser was NOT named after the red panda, and the logo is a red fox, not a red panda. The first part of the paragraph now deals with the branding (the live feed is not evidence of why the name was originally picked). The second part is about Mozilla claiming that firefox is a name for red panda (which seems to be an American invention, as there is no evidence whatsoever that it comes from Chinese), and now providing the live link. Donlammers (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Distribution

Does anyone have evidence for the distribution stated by "Its westernmost limit is the Annapurna Range in Nepal, and the easternmost is the Qinling Mountains of the Shaanxi Province in China."? This information is stated in the IUCN assessment. They seem to be quoting Roberts and Gittleman (1984, which we also use), but that article does NOT support this statement. When HXL49 changed Quin Ling to Qinling, I first verified this, then realized that the species distribution map in our article did NOT extend to those Mountains, and that the Qinling Mountains article did not include red panda in its fauna list. This seems to be correct, as Roberts and Gittleman state in 1984 "the northern and eastern limit is the upper Min Valley of western Sichuan" -- hardly the Qinling Mountains in Shaanxi Province. Wei, Feng, Wang, and Hu (1999) support our statement that "The red panda has become extirpated from the Chinese provinces of Guizhou, Gansu, Shaanxi and Qinghai", and this implies that at some point the red panda lived at least somewhere in Shaanxi Province, but I can't find a source for this outside the IUCN statement. I am handicapped by only being able to access the abstract for the Wei et al article, so the article itself may say something more about the historic range if someone has access. Donlammers (talk) 15:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Per Wegge found red pandas during a survey in the 1970s in the Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, which is to the southwest of Annapurna CA. According to the Nepal Biodiversity Resource Book, red pandas are also found in Rara National Park, which is even further west of Annapurna CA. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

That clarifies the western border a bit, though I worry a bit about how current some of this is. 1970 is practically ancient history for animal distribution. It would be better to have some sort of "red pandas have been reported from here to there historically, but currently...". The eastern range is implied to be to the Qinling Mountains fairly recently too, but that's not where they are now. Donlammers (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Aryal reports that red pandas are fairly common in DHR: see link to his papers academicjournals.org/IJBC/PDF/pdf%202010/Mar/Aryal%20et%20al.pdf and academicjournals.org/JENE/PDF/Pdf2010/Apr/Aryal%20et%20al.pdf and http://snowleopardnetwork.org/bibliography/AryalFinal08.pdf. Am afraid he may also just refer to Wegge's report. A more recent one is Kandel's 2009 report Human pressure and its impact on the distribution and conservation status of Red Panda in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve with intro at http://eco.confex.com/eco/2009/techprogram/P20744.HTM. Am in a rush. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Unlinked: those are cites to a predatory open access journal. Guy (Help!) 19:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Classification

The statement of classification (with citation) is the third paragraph in the lead. In addition, there is more detail under Phylogenetics. I just reread the lead as reverted though, and I think the statement that it is "only distantly related" is good to have right at the front. If someone thinks it's redundant with paragraph three though, I won't argue. Donlammers (talk) 19:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Differences with giant panda

The following link is not an appropriate external link, but may come in handy if we decide to add something about the differences between giant and red pandas: Sympatric Giant Panda and Red Panda. I'm not convinced this is important, since we already discuss the scientific confusion around the matter and cite it pretty well. However, if someone can make use of this, it's here.

Behavior

"If they feel threatened or sense danger, they may try to escape by climbing a rock column or tree. If they can no longer flee, they stand on their hind legs to make themselves appear larger and use the sharp claws on their front paws to defend themselves." Can anyone provide a citation for this? I have been looking in one of my red panda books and can't information about these behaviors as a response to threat. Seadark (talk) 04:33, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Physical Characteristics

Need to describe it better.

Voxhit (talk) 02:25, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

In captivity

I am removing birth announcements. It started as triplets and quadruplets only, but has now devolved to listing just about any birth. With over 100 each at Nashville and Rotterdam, the rest are hardly notable. I would love to put something about "usually singles or twins, but triplets have been born at xxx in xxxx, quadruplets in yyy...". If nothing else, this would limit the list. However, the current article and citations say 1-4 cubs, so I can't say "usually 1 or 2" without some additional research. Maybe some day Don Lammers (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Naming the panda

I'm getting a headache trying to figure out all the name issues surrounding this species. I am going to be bold and do the following:

• Remove firefox from the lead. This name is discussed in the body of the article as a literal translation from Chinese, but firefox is not a common name for the species, either in English or Chinese, at this time, so I don't think it belongs in the lead. There is evidently evidence from Chinese books (cited, but I don't have access to them) that places the use of "firefox" in China back to at least 1984 (based on the publish date).
• Put "shining-cat" back where it belongs as the meaning of Ailurus Fulgens (it's not "called" shining-cat anywhere that I've ever seen -- it "means" shining cat), following the format in the Giant panda article and all the other mammal articles I just looked at (taxonomic name in parentheses, italicized, and not bold).
• Hopefully I can find the Firefox article where the naming of the browser was discussed. It was NOT named "after" the red Panda, and the logo is a red fox, not a red panda, though recently the browser folks have been playing up the connection to red panda. Until and unless I can, I'm going to leave everything else alone, though I don't think the alleged connection is entirely accurate. In fact, at one point is was specifically denied (unless my memory is completely hosed, which is always possible).

Hopefully I don't offend too many people with these changes. If you disagree, please comment here and we will work towards fixing any issues. Don Lammers (talk) 00:14, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

agree with this approach. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:42, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The (well-referenced) information that an alternative Chinese name for the red panda is huǒhú (which literally means fire fox) was removed as being "some nonsense", without further explanation. Higher up on the page are several citations of the use of firefox or fire-fox in English texts that well predate the February 9, 2004, announcement by Mozilla of the name Firefox for its browser. Mozilla explained the name change on its website on the same day, stating that the name meant "red panda". They may not have named it Firefox because they felt an urgent desire to name a product after Ailurus fulgens, but it is also not the case that they came up only later with this story on the meaning of the name. Suppose for a moment they had picked the name Firebug. Then they would likewise have explained that it is similar to Firebird, easy to remember, and sounds good. And they would next have answered the question "What's a Firebug" by informing the reader that it is an insect with a striking red and black coloration. It doesn't have to be in the lead, but now the present article text does not mention the name firefox at all, which is overdoing it in the other direction.  --Lambiam 23:49, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Error in Evolutionary History Section

Original text: "The specific epithet is the Latin adjective fulgens, "shining".[38] At various times, it has been placed in Procyonidae, Ursidae, with Ailuropoda in Ailuridae, and in its own family, Ailuridae."

This section contains a bad error, but the page is locked for editing. The Ailuropoda are actually in Ursidae not in Ailuridae, though the author might have meant they were once placed with giant pandas in Ailuropodidae before it was made a subfamily of Ursidae (subfamily Ailuropodinae).

Here's a possible revision:

"The specific epithet is the Latin adjective fulgens, "shining".[38] At various times, it has been placed in Procyonidae, Ursidae, and with Ailuropoda in Ailuropodidae (prior to its move into Ursidae), and in its own family, Ailuridae."

Irondogs (talk) 18:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for spotting it. I've fixed it.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 11:56, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I have clarified a bit. "Its move to Ursidae" is ambiguous because the last use of "its" in the sentence refers to the red panda. Also, in WIkipadia, it seems the subfamily is listed as Ailuropodinae. Finally Ailuropodinae and Ailuropodidae both just redirect to Ailuropoda, so I put the wikilink there instead. I'm a b it fuzzy on taxonomic naming, so if I didn't get that right please correct it. Don Lammers (talk) 16:19, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect information about red pandas removed from the wild

It states that Glatston personally handled 350 pandas over 17 years. These were not wild animals that were brought into the population. These were managed animals already in zoos in a studbook. She is the international studbook keeper for red pandas. She is referring to the number of animals she managed in zoos, not captured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.90.154.222 (talk) 13:49, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The word "firefox" doesn't even appear in the article anymore except in a citation at the bottom

At the bottom of the article, it currently says 'Naish, Darren (2008-04-03). "Nigayla-ponya, firefox, true panda: its life and times". Tetrapod Zoology. Retrieved 2010-01-09.' in a citation. That is the only place the word "firefox" currently occurs in the article.

It has been demonstrated many times that the name "firefox", "fire fox", or "fire-fox" is one of the common names that has been used for the red panda species, going back many decades prior to the existence of any web browser named "Firefox".

It is my contention that the removal of this commonly used name from the article was done by people who mistakenly believed that the name "firefox" for red panda was never commonly used prior to the "Firefox" web browser's existence, when in fact that WAS a common name for the species even before the "Firefox" web browser.

The article in its current form does not mention the word "firefox" or any of this naming controversy even ONCE. I believe this constitutes a bias against the idea that "firefox" is a commonly used name for this species. The word ought to appear at least ONCE in the article or at least get a PASSING mention to this controversy somewhere.

In conclusion, I find it remarkable that the Firefox disambiguation page has a link to the red panda page, when the red panda page only has the word firefox once at the bottom appearing as the quoted name of a cited article. If you are really THAT adamant that "firefox" is not an appropriate name for the red panda that you are unwilling to have that name appear even once in the red panda article, then the link from the Firefox disambiguation page to the red panda page ought to be removed. As things stand, it is quite inconsistent and illogical.

I think the source I cited for the name "firefox", BBC Nature, is a very reputable source, as the BBC is the most well-known and trusted news organization worldwide, and easily meets Wikipedia's criteria for being a reliable source. The thoughtless revert of my edit was uncalled for and I hardly think it is justified. In fact, this talk page has many other persuasive arguments by people likewise advocating the same side of this argument as me, and I would advise those who revert any edits that mention that this species is sometimes called a "firefox" to consider the fact that half the people posting here on the talk page strongly disagree with them and this matter can HARDLY be considered settled in favor of people who don't think "firefox" was commonly used as a name for this species prior to the existence of "Mozilla Firefox". That side of the argument is simply factually inaccurate and has no basis in reality. I would like to see them find some sources they can cite that say that this species WASN'T called a "firefox" prior to "Mozilla Firefox". I doubt they can even find ONE reputable source that would say that, whereas there are countless sources where the name "firefox" was indeed used in past decades, many of which are mentioned by other people on this talk page and which I do not need to repeat again here, just scroll up and you'll find them listed by other people. This is almost as ridiculous as if the article about snow leopards were rewritten to eliminate any mention of the name "snow leopard" after the release of "Mac OS X Snow Leopard".

Honestly, I was merely attempting to correct a grave error in this article and it gets immediately reverted by someone who is obviously misinformed because the facts speak for themselves. I do hasten to add, of course, that I am assuming good will on the part of those who are mistaken about the facts, I am not in any way attempting to denigrate their intentions, I am sure they believe that they are factually correct and that I am misinformed. Regardless, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and leaving out relatively important information about something in an article about it is misguided. For articles about rare species such as this, common names that they are known by ought to be included in the articles, since not everyone refers to a species by the same name. There is plenty of room for compromise. For instance, the name "firefox" could be mentioned, but it could come with a little disclaimer that would say that there is an ongoing dispute/controversy as to whether or not this was a common name for the red panda prior to "Mozilla Firefox" coming out.

That could be in the middle or near the end of the article rather than the head paragraph. But to not even mention the "firefox" thing once in the article, that is just absurd, there ought to be some better way to settle this dispute than to not mention it at all in the main article, especially seeing as the Firefox disambiguation page is pointing at this article. See for yourself. That appears to be a logical contradiction, between the Firefox disambiguation page and this page, meaning one of the 2 pages must be wrong and needs to be corrected. In my humble opinion, it is this page, the red panda page. If you disagree, then by all means, resolve the logical contradiction the other way, and remove the "red panda" link from the Firefox disambiguation page, but as it stands, Wikipedia is contradicting itself on this matter, which means at least one of the contradictory pages must be fixed once people can come to a consensus as to what the truth is. I hardly see how Wikipedia expects to be taken seriously as an encyclopedia if it doesn't at least TRY to avoid contradicting itself, and if efforts to remove these contradictions get very quickly reverted. I do accept the possibility that I may be wrong in this matter, and that is why I have proposed to you the solution of removing red pandas from the Firefox disambiguation page, if everyone else does come to a consensus that "firefox" is not a valid name for this species. Regardless, I believe the facts are on my side in this matter, and that "firefox" has been used to refer to red pandas for decades (although not necessarily as a single word, sometimes perhaps with a space or hyphen in between "fire" and "fox"). But since it is quite a rare species that used to be little-known, naturally this information has not always been widely available to the general populace (for instance, when I was a child, the only pandas I had ever heard of were giant pandas).

I apologize if this argument has been wordy or repetitive, I was just trying to get all of my points across so that anyone else who reads this talk page will be able to read and consider them, and so that perhaps we can come to some sort of consensus based on a compromise over how to include the word "firefox" somewhere in this article, so as to remove the blindingly obvious logical contradiction between this page and the Firefox disambiguation page. --Yetisyny (talk) 10:54, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

See also my contribution above at Naming the panda.  --Lambiam 20:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

This topic was amply discussed a couple of years ago already. see these contributions. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 21:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I presented the following two Chinese sources as references, both giving 火狐 as an alternative name for Ailurus fulgens, the first predating Mozilla's browser by many years:

• 中国西南民族硏究会 (1986). 西南民族地区经济概况. 四川省民族研究所. p. 127.
• 勒安旺堆，云南省迪庆藏族自治州地方志编纂委员会, ed. (2003). 迪庆藏族自治州志. Vol. 1. 云南民族出版社. p. 196.

Both are printed books and the first predates Mozilla's browser by many years. However, these references were removed because by the previous discussions it is an established and unquestionable fact that 火狐 is not a Chinese name for the red panda and therefore sources using it are ipso facto unreliable and should not be used.  --Lambiam 10:08, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

PLEASE MOVE UP THE FIREFOX REFERENCE. THANK YOU. It also needs to be in disambiguation if not already there! As a longtime Mozilla community member, I can tell you affirmatively that the browser was named Firebird until a disgruntled database company cried foul, so they searched for another 'fire' animal, so NO, Mozilla didn't make up the name!Jhrussell401 (talk) 05:38, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2014

Under threats, there is a line that reads "Glatston reported he personally had handled 350 red pandas in 17 years." There isn't any mention to Glatston before, so I would suggest naming her as Dr. Angela Glatston and perhaps making a brief mention of her career or relevance here.

Also, it should be she, not he. Nelovishk (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 11:42, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done The request is clear and correct. Don't bite the newbies applies here, I think. User:GKFX^talk 16:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have made it clear that I made the edit before reading the request, and so it wasn't done exactly as requested here. User:GKFX^talk 16:11, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2014

The red panda was Ireland's favourite zoo animal in 2013[1].

A potentially relevant addition to the cultural depiction section of the page. Dalel487 (talk) 21:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Done -- TOW  01:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Contradiction on pets.

It is claimed at this point that the pandas are kept as pets, but at Red panda#Domestication that they generally are not. Any thoughts? User:GKFX^talk 16:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2014

Remove entirely the line "The logo of the Firefox web browser depicts a red panda curled up around the globe. The name "Firefox" is stated to derive from a nickname of the red panda." or at least the first sentence, reworking the second into something like "The name of the Firefox web browser derives from a nickname of the red panda.". The sources cited to do not explicitly say whether Firefox was named after a (purported) nickname of the red panda or if it was merely a coincidence, and they definitely do not say that the animal in the logo is a Red Panda - it is quite clearly a red fox. Thunderclaw (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

 Not done - the first source implies strongly that the meaning of Firefox was known to the namers, meaning it was deliberate. (See section "What is a Firefox?") The logo is not mentioned in the article anyway. User:GKFX^talk 18:43, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Could someone edit this sentence?

"In English, the red panda is also called lesser panda, though due to the pejorative implications of this name, "red" is generally preferred." Obviously it's not "pejorative" since it's a measure of the animal's size, not its value. 109.157.79.50 (talk) 15:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Done - UtherSRG (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 July 2015

Delete caption "A red panda standing on the ground".

"standing on the ground" is superfluous to the point of being almost comical, and the caption above already says that it is a red pands, which is very obvious anyway from context.

109.153.245.89 (talk) 00:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Red pandas could be standing on branches, and the caption on top is the title of the infobox. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Let me repeat. The caption is unnecessary. It is OBVIOUS that the animal is standing on the ground. Stating it is silly. It is OBVIOUS that the caption above applies to the picture, and that the main picture in an article about a red panda will be of a red panda. The article did very well for a long time without such a redundant caption, and will do very well in future when this one is removed. 109.153.245.89 (talk) 02:00, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

That's your interpretation of it, and one not based on site policies or guidelines. MOS:CAPTION requires captions for pictures. If you can think of a more descriptive caption, maybe we can work it in. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, wait, I see that the more specific guidelines actually says that it's ok to remove it. I'm still not convinced that it harms the article, however. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:15, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

New Baby Red Panda born at the Detroit Zoo June 22, 2015

We're happy to welcome Tofu to the Detroit Zoo and to contribute to the captive population of this threatened species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.165.176 (talk) 21:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Actually Endangered

Guys, I looked it up on National Geographic, It is actually endangered. Would someone please change that? Frozenfire71 (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2015

Please add some more infomation on that the firefox browser uses this as their offical animal in the logo of firefox in windows 8 2015 10 19 16 58 AM 65.175.134.44 (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

• Already done There is already a short blurb in the Cultural depictions section of the article. If you want to add more please be explicit with your request by stating it in a "Please change X to Y" format. Thank you. --Stabila711 (talk) 22:48, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Red panda. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110516101937/http://www.resourceshimalaya.org:80/content_files/HH15december2010_sAnUmAn4d1868cad8a71.pdf to http://www.resourceshimalaya.org/content_files/HH15december2010_sAnUmAn4d1868cad8a71.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Please remove the Space Travel section

Please remove the `Space Travel` section, as recently added by user Siconnect. Thanks. Tomjnixon (talk) 14:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Done Sam Sailor ^Talk! 15:28, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2016

the red panda is identified as an endangered species, when in reality according to WAZA the red panda is only vulnerable Pbrad101 (talk) 01:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Not done: According to http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/714/0 , which is used to cite the listing, the species is Endangered. Re-open this request if you have a source that states otherwise. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 02:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Firefox web browser name reference

Reference 74 has moved to http://www-archive.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/firefox-name-faq.html.

(Why is the page locked? I see no explicit mention on the talk page, but it sounds like it's been locked for years...)

208.91.114.4 (talk) 00:09, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Archive link added. It was locked a few months ago because of the sort of recurring vandalism that wouldn't get much talk page discussion. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Stufful & Bewear from Pokémon Sun & Pokémon Moon (2016)

The latest two installments of Nintendo and Game Freak's Pokémon video game series feature two new collectible creatures: Stufful and its evolved form Bewear. The two are very obviously based on red pandas in color and design, with their red fur, black limbs, white ears, cuddly appearance, and raccoon-like tails. This is especially apparent for the quadrupedal Stufful. I think this is worth adding to "Cultural depictions" section of the main article. I would add it myself if the article was not partially protected. --101Animals (talk) 00:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

References

Request: New image for species box

I recently took this photo of Jang in Duisburg, Germany. It clearly shows all the features of a Red Panda and it also shows him on a branch, rather than on the ground which is more typical for Red Pandas. The image is also clearer and sharper than the current photo. Mattis2412 (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Red panda. 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/20110728031545/http://www.smallcarnivoreconservation.org/sccwiki/images/b/bf/SCC40_Sharma_and_Belant.pdf to http://www.smallcarnivoreconservation.org/sccwiki/images/b/bf/SCC40_Sharma_and_Belant.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727205044/http://www.redpandas.org/biology/archives/1825/histoire-naturelle-des-mammifere to http://www.redpandas.org/biology/archives/1825/histoire-naturelle-des-mammifere
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121015092037/http://www.sil.org/acpub/repository/26456.pdf to http://www.sil.org/acpub/repository/26456.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110311125529/http://www.reviews.media-culture.org.au/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2645 to http://reviews.media-culture.org.au/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2645
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110918112214/http://www.wickedlocal.com/watertown/fun/entertainment/arts/x572597095/Dustin-Hoffman-on-his-new-role-as-the-voice-of-a-red-panda to http://www.wickedlocal.com/watertown/fun/entertainment/arts/x572597095/Dustin-Hoffman-on-his-new-role-as-the-voice-of-a-red-panda

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 17:34, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Red panda. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.resourceshimalaya.org/content_files/HH15december2010_sAnUmAn4d1868cad8a71.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090902025107/http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/red_panda_empire.php to http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/red_panda_empire.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110103034404/http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/09/exclusive-a-red-panda-in-tennessee-fossils-confirm-n-american/ to http://www.aolnews.com/2010/08/09/exclusive-a-red-panda-in-tennessee-fossils-confirm-n-american/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091015182047/http://nationalzoo.si.edu/publications/zoogoer/1992/2/redpandasfirecat.cfm to http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/1992/2/redpandasfirecat.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120228204829/http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/firefox-name-faq.html to http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/firefox-name-faq.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321192747/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=10328 to http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=10328
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110613052228/http://infohost.nmt.edu/~biology/EvolutionWeb/Miyashiro/PandasBackground.pdf to http://infohost.nmt.edu/~biology/EvolutionWeb/Miyashiro/PandasBackground.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 14:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

RfC about Pokemon references to red pandas

The consensus is that the article should not mention Stufful and Bewear.

Cunard (talk) 00:22, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should this article mention Stufful and Bewear? RedPanda25 13:01, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Survey

• No Having read the article and the discussion below, I don't think that the mention would be of any merit or of benefit to the article or to the reader of the article. If anyone reading the Pokemon article wants to know what a Red Panda might be, on reading that any of the characters are Red Pandas, let them follow the link to this article, not the other way round. It would be reasonable to mention something along the lines of: "Like many other striking species of animal, Red Pandas have been represented in various media and toys." Whether to add the likes of: "such as Pokemon" is a matter of taste. I would not go further than that and do not think it is necessary even to add that. JonRichfield (talk) 06:49, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
• No. Sections from "Cultural depictions" or "X in culture" have a bad habit of collecting cruft. Pokemon has a zillion different animals, and it's just not very significant to an article on Red Pandas. Kung Fu Panda is also a bit thin, being an assortment of animals, but at least I found a NewYorkTimes article about Red Pandas that considered it noteworthy to make passing mention of Kung Fu Panda. Culture sections really should cite sources that actually note cultural-significance themselves. Otherwise you just get cruft and OR+SYN of editors tossing together random examples and calling it cultural significant ourselves. Alsee (talk) 06:09, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
• Yes - I don't see why this content wouldn't be included in a In Popular Culture section. Appreciate Alsee's thoughts about cruft, but Culture sections tend to include a little cruft, and it's not always bad... NickCT (talk) 19:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • No, unless... - On second thought; Tigraan is obviously right. The information should be verifiable before going in. NickCT (talk) 18:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
• (bot-summoned) No, unless... there is a secondary RS discussing the animal that makes the connection to the Pokemon, per above. By the way, looking for another example, I see that Pikachu is not included in either List of fictional rodents or List of fictional rodents in video games. For that one, there is probably a source out there... Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • In fairness, Pikachu itself is generally regarded as being based on a pika, which isn't a rodent. Anaxial (talk) 14:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
• No. Fully agree with JonRichfield's and Alsee's arguments and suggestions. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:12, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
• No. While it's likely that red pandas are of relevance to particular pokemon, the reverse isn't necessarily true. If there was some good source out there, on the primary subject of red pandas, that referred to the pokemon, it might be worth evaluating for notability, but there doesn't even seem to be that much. It's just minor trivia, especially since Stufful and Bewear apparently aren't notable enough for more than a single line even in the articles that are specifically about pokemon. Anaxial (talk) 14:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
• No - Anaxial expresses my view succinctly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:31, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

RedPanda25 - there are two reasons why this newest instance of "eeeeh, I recognize an animal in Pokemon!" should not be added to the article: a) providing the inspiration for a comic, animation, or game character is not an indication of notability. You may notice that House mouse does not include a five-screen list of cartoon mice. b) Even if if this were sufficient, you would need to provide an authoritative source that states, expressly, "Pokemon X is based on the red panda". What you or anyone else concludes privately, based on similarity, has no weight whatsoever. We summarize existing sources, we don't insert our own conclusions. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:57, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I have to agree. The criteria for any item's inclusion in a Wikipedia article is that it is mentioned in WP:SECONDARY sources. There are other places on the web like a blog or your facebook page. MarnetteD|Talk 21:06, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I would disagree with the argument here, although agree the conclusion.

It's not just about sourcing (Pokemon can source itself very robustly), it's about relevance. The relevance here just isn't commutative: red pandas might be important to Pokemon, but Pokemon just doesn't matter to red pandas. It doesn't belong here for that reason, and no amount of sourcing will change that. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:54, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

You are right of course; the commutative relevance test is the most suitable measure to use for popular culture items, and I should remember to put it front and center. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:29, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

In this case, the relevance is commutative; because, as stated, the Pokemon reference supports the misconception that red pandas are bears. And as for a source, I have this. RedPanda25 13:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Pokemon is not any sort of RS for anything to do with red pandas. Also the community-sourced supposition of Bulbapedia even fails RS for in-universe Pokemon content.

The closest I can see Pokemon getting to being included in Red panda under an IPC section would be if a Pokemen red panda (and not a Pokemon that isn't a red panda) has generated enough visible press (maybe as Guardians of the Galaxy did for raccoons) that it raises the public profile of red pandas generally. This would need secondary sourcing, not merely primary sourcing from Pokemon. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I'd be happy to see it in Red_panda#Cultural_depictions if a secondary source discussed it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:40, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately it seems as though the only sources which mentions the connection with red pandas are fan-made wikis. Would such a source be sufficient? RedPanda25 02:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Generally not; see WP:USERGENERATED. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2018

In this article, several place names mentioned include:

• At the Cincinnati Zoo
• Red panda at Prospect Park Zoo, New York
• curator of red pandas and special exhibits at the Knoxville Zoo in Knoxville, Tennessee,
• the Rotterdam Zoo in the Netherlands
• The Padmaja Naidu Himalayan Zoological Park in Darjeeling, India,
• a male red panda at Birmingham Nature Centre in Birmingham, England, escaped

This is all very inconsistent. Some countries (Holland, India, England) are mentioned explicitly, whereas some countries (America) are omitted.

If counties / states are important, then Darjeeling should be "Darjeeling, West Bengal, India" and Birmingham should be "Birmingham, West Midlands, England". If countries / states are not important, then Knoxville Zoo should be in "Knoxville, America", etc. to be consistent.

If it's important to specify the country when mentioning Darjeeling, Birmingham, etc. then it is also important to specify the country for American locations to be consistent. 58.166.139.124 (talk) 09:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure that follows. English counties, American counties, Indian states, etc, aren't necessarily equivalent in size or importance, so it doesnt' automatically make sense to include all of them in all cases. I think the rule should be to give as much information as is necessary to identify the location without going overboard. For example, there are lots of Birminghams, so we need to make it clear which one we are talking about. But there is only one Birmingham in England, so "Birmingham, England" is all you need to say. Iapetus (talk) 14:18, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2018

2600:1700:2E20:D60:7425:92A5:4F24:C3B7 (talk) 22:51, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

 Not done For an edit request to work, you need to:

• identify a specific part of the article that needs to be changed (quoting as needed),
• explain what change needs to be made (giving us as complete details as possible),
• explain the reasons why this change should be made (based on reliable sources or this site's policies and guidelines.

Edit requests are not a key to have a robot unlock the article for you, they are a means of communicating with other humans who will carry out the changes if they are reasonable. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:04, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2019

I would like to add that in Nepal they are called Fire Foxes. RedPanda06 (talk) 11:30, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

What's your source for that? It's already under alternative English names, BTW (Red_panda#English_names). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:45, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. NiciVampireHeart 15:42, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2019

Kindly add a weblink to the Sorbus wardii https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbus Zakir09135 (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

 Done NiciVampireHeart 12:33, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 February 2020

ADD news that red pandas are TWO species not one:

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-51632790

"The red panda is not one species but two, according to DNA evidence.

...Researchers in China analysed the DNA of 65 wild red pandas. This revealed two separate species which went their own separate ways after populations were divided by a river about 250 thousand years ago."

-- Saltation (not logged in for ~decade, looks like either my account's been suspended or I didn't record a changed password)

202.86.32.140 (talk) 05:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

We should wait for the peer-reviewed article to be published, but NOT announce this here with a newspaper article as sole reference!! 65 samples is not a large sample size for such a conclusion. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 08:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

[article] has now been published. Given the rather large size and scope of the red panda page, how should we split it up? Geekgecko (talk) 15:27, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2020

🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯 soooo many errors lema fix em 70.185.18.232 (talk) 13:36, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to go ahead, but this request template is for specific changes that you want to make. —  Jts1882 | talk  13:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2020

Request to remove citation (3): Flynn(2000), p 197. As any attempt to find such a journal or paper proves fruitless and it appears to be unverified Somethingoriginalwastaken (talk) 07:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

​The full citation is actually already present elsewhere on the page, the title is "Whence the Red Panda?". I have now fixed the broken link in that short footnote, thanks for pointing it out. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Evidence for two species of red panda

Recent genome sequencing of distinct populations of red panda has revealed significant genetic divergence in mitochondrial DNA, whole genome DNA and Y chromosome DNA. This genetic divergence corresponds to the distribution of the Himalayan and Chinese red panda subspecies and is the first convincing evidence that the two species exist as two separate species of red panda, the Himalayan red panda (A. fulgens) and the Chinese red panda (A. styani). I propose the re-listing of the two red panda subspecies as separate species, or at least a mention under the 'Phylogeny' heading that it has been proposed they form two separate species.

DocLovely (talk) 11:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)