Talk:African wildlife

I'm almost certain that the "unknown bird" is a Crowned Plover (Vanellus coronatus).

Does this page really belong here? The title "African flora and fauna" is a HUGE subject. I have a whole shelf of books that barely scratch the surface. The pictures seem to be of "KNP flora and fauna" which could be a subpage of KNP.

Does Wikivoyage want to get into the flora and fauna area?

--(WT-en) Nzpcmad 17:54, 13 Oct 2004 (EDT)

Every African guidebook I've ever seen has a section on the animals you're likely to encounter on a safari, so I think Wikivoyage can and should copy that. We don't need to document every obscure species of jungle beetle though. (WT-en) Jpatokal 21:20, 13 Oct 2004 (EDT)

This page was created thanks to discussion on Talk:Kruger National Park and was originally a subsection (not subpage) of that page, hence the frequent references to KNP. The discussion on that page figured that having one page with African flora and fauna would be easier than having every park's entry talk about how elephants get near the cars etc etc.

I agree that this page's frequent references to KNP ought to be changed to be more general, but presumably that's WIP. -- (WT-en) Hypatia 04:59, 14 Oct 2004 (EDT)

The page seems to be a big success with more than 30 visitors and 4 talk contributions on its first day. Obviously it was started as a collection of animals from the Kruger National Park KNP in South Africa and all references of that should be deleted unless animals can be only spotted there. References to particular region such as the rift valley and its soda lakes which support mainly flamingos are probably adequate. The page can be well justified in a travel guide for African national parks, because the most interesting things to see are very likely to be animals and plants. Obviously the Amboseli National Park or Rift valley in Kenya have some nice geographical features as well.

(WT-en) Jens 10:27, 16 Oct 2004

Move the "National Parks"?

Does the long list of National Parks really belong on this page? Couldn't there be another one for it? -- (WT-en) DanielC 10:03, 12 Jun 2005 (EDT)

There is already another list. See African National Parks. I think we could do with a link only. (WV-en) Felix 17:01 (GMT), 12/June/2005

Chimpanzees and Gorillas?

Perhaps a section on chimps and gorillas could be added as gorilla and chimp tracking safaris, albeit costly ones, exist, and it's always possible to stumble upon anything on one's one.

• http://www.responsibletravel.com/Trip/Trip100054.htm
• http://www.uyaphi.com/uganda/safari/express-6days.htm
• http://www.adventurecenter.com/Guerba/frame_uec.htm

67.23.48.38 17:47, 10 Dec 2005 (EST)

"Red hornbill" incorrect

I don't have time to fix it right now, but the "red hornbill" pictured are actually southern ground hornbill, not red-billed hornbill.

—The preceding comment was added by Lengau (talk • contribs)

We could simply change the caption. I'll have a look. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Caption changed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

The file name should also be changed (on Commons). Is there a species or genus called red-horned hornbill, or it is a less specific name, perhaps covering also the one imaged? --LPfi (talk) 05:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks folks. I've requested a rename on Commons and I'll update the page now with better info. Lengau (talk) 22:35, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I've updated the page now to separate hornbills from ground hornbills. If someone could take a look I'd really appreciate it. Lengau (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Format

This article has a very strange, irregular format. Apparently, in order to have photos of every type of wildlife on the page, there are huge areas of white space between every entry. I disapprove, and would suggest normal bulleted entries and fewer photos. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Look at articles like United States National Parks and Indian national parks and wildlife sanctuaries. No attempt is made to include photographs of every park and wildlife sanctuary, and even so, they are image-heavy and arguably too much so. Keep in mind Wikivoyage:Image policy#Minimal use of images. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Too many images

There are too many images here that violate Wikivoyage:Image policy. Which ones should go? --SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 13:24, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

There's also a ridiculous amount of extra white space on the left that should be deleted. Images with small animals in thumbnail view like the one with the wild dogs are easy to remove, but I think we should get rid of all the extra space and just remove images randomly, for the most part, unless someone really wants to take time with this task. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I removed all the <br> tags yesterday from the Mammals section, but if there are no other objections, I'll implement your suggestion next week. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 06:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I think images can be removed non-randomly. We could link all animals to Wikipedia articles and indirectly to Commons galleries or sections (using {{marker|wikidata=}}), so then the point wouldn't be to show the individual species, but to have a varied selection of good images. I think that in such use, images of wildlife on the savanna or in a bush – i.e. the viewing experience – is more important than having a portrait photos of animals. I won't do it now, but could do it in a few weeks. –LPfi (talk) 07:16, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Why would we want to have such wholesale violations of Wikivoyage:Links to Wikipedia? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

We commonly include links to Wikipedia in listings. Here the equivalent are the animals. We don't want to include encyclopedic descriptions of them, but readers may want to have them. That way we can concentrate on what is important for us, such as where you can find them (Wikipedia might tell where they live, but that's not the same thing). –LPfi (talk) 10:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

But these aren't listings. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Exactly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

LPfi, could you please explain why we'll ever have to use listings or markers in this article? (unless we're markering destinations, but that's beside the point) SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 10:50, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

We don't want to copy the Wikipedia articles to here, but there is much in the Wikipedia articles that a reader of this article might find valuable (most of the Wikipedia content, I'd guess, for some of the animals presented). At the moment there is not even any links to related articles or categories at Wikipedia and Commons (I assume they don't have a by-continent article like this), so the reader needs to know those sister sites well to access the information.

On the other hand, while destination articles presents attractions, with links to Wikipedia if available, this article presents animals, but because the article isn't in the form of a list of listings, the links aren't allowed. By using markers for the links we would keep to our standards more or less, and I think we would be doing our readers a favour.

What reason is there not to allow such links (other than that it formally is against the external links policy until we degrade the article to a list of listings)?

–LPfi (talk) 13:14, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Animals aren't places. Why would we want a marker for anything that's not a place? Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:47, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

We don't want a marker on the map, but the functionality of {{marker |name=Whatever |lat=NA|long=NA|wikidata=Qxxxx}}. –LPfi (talk) 20:39, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I really think we can leave readers to their own devices if they want to find encyclopedic information about animals. Do you really want to establish a precedent of linking to dozens of Wikipedia articles about animals and plants in most any article about a park, rural area and beyond? If so: (a) what about historical periods, artistic terms and any of hundreds of other potentially interesting topics with articles on Wikipedia; and (b) I think you need to restart discussion at Wikivoyage:Links to Wikipedia#Allow some links to Wikipedia. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Using markers to dodge the Wikivoyage:Links to Wikipedia policy honestly seems like cheating the policy IMO. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 00:52, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I think one should dodge the policy when that serves the traveller and the site, but if it does not in this case, then let's leave the links out. I rest my case. –LPfi (talk) 12:02, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Gorilla advice

I removed the link to Wanderlust gorilla advice. It seems to be against our guidelines (only link official sites), and some of the listed places seem to be better off without tourists.

Somebody still might want to check their advice and perhaps add sections/listings to relevant region and city articles.

–LPfi (talk) 17:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)