Talk:Javan rhinoceros

Removed unsourced section

I removed the following recently added long and unsourced section from the text. Proper references should be provided before any of it is reinserted. See WP:NOR and WP:RS

It would be maybe correct to notice, that the regions in which the Javan Rhinoceros was used to live, have been subject not only to hunt for their horns and blood, at least in the regions stretching from Laos, down through Vietnam. Indeed, it is hardly possible, that the illegal hunters have brought the species on the verge of extinction (despite the expansion of the market of rhinos' horns and blood, following to the enrichment of a small part of the society in the Asian South-East, collaborating with the Colonial power - these people are always curiously attracted by implausible qualities of exotic and rare substances) if we mind to remember that the whole region has been ruthlessly subjected to a bloody and terrorist series of wars, beginning right after World War II and ending in the late '70s - in its operations as open warfare covered by media. We must not forget the millions of tons of poisonous chemical substances, explosives, napalm which the American army had dropped in the whole region - from Laos to Vietnam, and up to Cambodia - from early '60s to late '70s.

How many rhinoceros had died, in that war?

We are usually keen to forget, even about the human victims - let alone the animals' ones - that we just notice that the same jungles and plains inhabited by Vietnamese, Laotian and Cambodian people, were also inhabited by innumerable animals, as the people killed in terrible deaths of fire or pain, or slow agonies by poisoning and starvation amidst deserted lands. It is most likely that the endangered conditions of Rhinoceros sondaicus are due, not only to merchants of horns' dust, which is a phenomena which could account not, for it, since, of course, it is traditional medicine and thus it is going on since long time, and never had brought the rhinos near to extinction, but, mainly to the effects on the environment and to the killings caused by the Imperialist War of the United States dubbed usually Vietnam War. The fault of the near extinction of Javan Rhinoceros is to blame on the West, and on the Western people which left the war unleash its unerring violence. --Merbabu 00:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, does this mean that someone else must already have made the connection between the dates, the numbers, and the regions? I mean, there is any need of reliable evidence to tell where the "Vietnam War" has been fought? And about it be a terrorist war, (meaning, as official Pentagon definition, conducted against the civilian population in order to achieve political or economical or social purposes) you can check on Noam Chomsky's American power and the New Mandarins (1968) Vintage, for example. But there is extensive bibliography about that. Wouldn't you agree if I tell, also, that by the late '30s extensive Colonial wars against the Movements of National Liberations have been fought in the same region, then WWII than Korea, then Cambodia, then Vietnam and Laos? This is, in my opinion, elementary history classes. For the relation with the population of rhinoceros, yet, I concede that no one of which I am acquainted has ever took a body count of animals, but, that cannot mean that there were no victims. Most likely, simply, no one ever cared to take a look or make the connection, but conflicts of such violence cannot really haven't provoked victims in the populations other than the human one.

The reasons for this connection to be gone unnoticed I do not know and I'm not interested in knowing it, it is just an observation, made on reliable and common knowledge sources (the Wikipedia article included). I do not believe it is original research, because no research has been involved in the writing of the paragraph.Protagora 01:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

thank you for your reply. I'm in a rush now so I will just make a few quick comments. Most (all??) of what you need to know about reliable sources and original research is in the links I gave you on this page and also on that welcome notice. As for the Vietnam War, no references for the dates for the war are not necessary (although I suggest they would be on the Vietnam War page), although citations for the connection made between the War and Rhino numbers would certainly be required. Otherwise, the assumption is that it is personal musings and original research. The guidelines on WP:NOR also state that there should be no synthesis of published ideas to form new ideas. All ideas must be published ideas. I am sure some of what you wrote you can reference. Hope that helps. regards --Merbabu 01:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction

Why does the chart on the right indicate this species as of least concern when the first sentence states that it is extemely rare and in danger.

Removed photograph

I have removed the photograph because it is showing an Indian Rhinoceros in its typical habitat. --Melly42 20:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

News sources to be added

I looked these sources up this evening and am leaving them here for now as I figure out which to integrate into the article. --JayHenry 05:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal

I'm proposing to merge the subspecies articles for Indian Javan Rhinoceros, Vietnamese Javan Rhinoceros and Indonesian Javan Rhinoceros into this article. The subspecies really only differ in terms of conservation history; virtually everything known about the species comes from the Indonesian subspecies. We can deal comprehensively with all subspecies in this article whereas to write a comprehensive article at the subspecies level would consist almost entirely of redundant content. To be clear, I am proposing to delete absolutely no information, merely to merge everything into one place so that it is better organized, better sourced (few sources deal with the subspecies individually), and better contextualized. --JayHenry 05:44, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Strong support - makes no sense having five disjointed articles. Deal with them all together - people tire of having to click on linked articles. --Merbabu 07:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Support. No need to create sub-species, unless the topic reaches substantial article size. — Indon (reply) — 11:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Captured on film

The following news article may be of interest to the authors of this page: Rarest rhinoceros wrecks camera, BBC News. Mgiganteus1 (talk) 10:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Another article, telling about the study which was being conducted, also featuring the footage: http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/05/29/rare-javan-rhino.html

Photo

Can we change the first photo to one that doesn't seem to glorify the killing of these animals? Given their status and the terrible over hunting that occurs, I agree that the photo should stay, but let's put a more appropriate endearing photo first. Whoever put that there had their head in the clouds. --Bentonia School (talk) 03:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, here's the thing -- it's all about copyright. The problem is that there are no photos of this animal that are not protected by copyright. This was the only photo of the animal taken before 1923, which is when copyright laws kick in to effect. If you have a picture of a Javan Rhinoceros, that you've taken yourself, we can use it. But there are only 50 in the world and none are in zoos, so taking their pictures is quite tricky :) --JayHenry (talk) 04:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Photo! i second that

Someone get me a plane to Java and I will take it. Seriously though, could anyone contribut a photo?

There were plenty on Commons, even of live ones, but no one bothered to look. FunkMonk (talk) 13:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus extinct?

Are there no captive specimens of this sub-species? FunkMonk (talk) 08:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I suppose not, tragically. BBC: The Vietnam rhino, as well as being the last of the species on mainland Asia, was also the last known surviving member of the Rhinoceros sondaicus annamiticus subspecies. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Indermis

I think I mean 'Indermis'... Anyway, in the section about the subspecies, it states that the Indian subspecies gets its scientific name 'indermis' because males have small horns, and females have NO horns. Yet, later on below, there is a drawing labeled as a female 'indermis,' and there's clearly a horn on it's nose. So it seems clear to me that it's NOT a pic of 'indermis,' or its at least inaccurate. Of course, I'm no expert, but, still... 147.226.222.102 (talk) 23:10, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Here's the source of the image[1] I'm not sure why it is captioned as belonging to that sub-species. FunkMonk (talk) 23:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Here's some info on specimens, and it seems that there was a one horned specimen[2] in London Zoo, so the caption is likely incorrect. FunkMonk (talk) 09:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Raffles-Museum.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Raffles-Museum.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Java-1934.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Java-1934.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Ujung-Kulon.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Ujung-Kulon.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:22, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Problem

Cite 5 of this article is a full book and there are no page numbers given for each cite. This could threaten its FA sttaus. LittleJerry (talk) 01:36, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

No Hope

Should we add that there is absolutely no hope for this species survival? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.128.11 (talk) 02:23, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Not unless a reliable source says so. CMD (talk) 02:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Source? Pure and simple logic. The species is already reduced to 40 individuals, and aren't they in a genetic bottleneck? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.128.11 (talk) 06:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Dunno. Species have been brought back from less. It's not wikipedia's job to determine the future, we rely on other sources to do that. CMD (talk) 13:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Re genetic bottlenecks. Some thoughts:

500 individuals would be wonderful for a fully adapting population. Some say 50 is a minimum to avoid inbreeding depression. The California condor went down to 27 before they decided to capture them all. ...and not all of them reproduced. So I would never say no hope, and what is gained by giving up? We could have given up on the condors but now there are more than 500 and more than 250 flying free. Certainly they have lost genetic diversity that is not coming back in the immediate term, but they are not extinct. 2601:19B:C600:51C0:45E2:F6E5:BA44:B7B0 (talk) 02:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Proof? >_> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.128.11 (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Black Robin. CMD (talk) 10:37, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Père David's Deer. --Taivo (talk) 10:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Przewalski's horse. CMD (talk) 13:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

What did those examples have in common? They were all captured and put in zoos/parks! There are no Javan rhinos in captivity, and they don't breed in captivity. Face it, this rhino is doomed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.98.128.11 (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The photo with a dead rhino

The shot rhino (the one with a hunter) seems to be incorrectly identified. Considering the shape of its head, its hoofs and its size, it is most likely a Sumatran Rhinoceros. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.37.205.231 (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't appear to have any hairs, not even on the ears. FunkMonk (talk) 20:05, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Link from "Extinct Animals"

This article is being linked from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_extinct_animals_of_Asia

Is this animal really extinct or Critically endangered? Need to edit either of the pages on basis of the facts. Is it a sub species? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohitkr05 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

"Sunda rhino"

The article at the moment generally calls this species the "Sunda rhino" as a result of this edit (the sole contribution of the user) back in December 2013, undiscussed as far as I can tell. Given the overwhelming prevalence of "Javan rhino", not to mention the article's title, surely this should be reversed. Frickeg (talk) 05:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

I've now reversed this. Zacwill16 (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Why give their exact location?

Is it really a good idea to all but give directions to would be poachers?! All of the rare rhinoceros pages list their locations. It just seems like you should want to make it at least a little bit of a challenge for a poacher to find them! 206.174.95.69 (talk) 08:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles do not prevent people from poaching : that is definitely the task of local authorities to strengthen protection measures, and enforce laws and regulations!! – BhagyaMani (talk) 08:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia is just citing other available sources for the locations. Even if they were removed here, they would still be available. In any case, you can be very sure poachers don't use Wikipedia to find animals in their own countries, they'd just ask locals. FunkMonk (talk) 10:26, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Exactly! They may not even have to ask locals, because they are locals themselves. I recall one who admitted to have killed some 20 when he was caught by police: he was illiterate. – BhagyaMani (talk) 10:58, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

new evidence of reproduction in the wild

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UD5uJjBGI0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:19B:C600:51C0:45E2:F6E5:BA44:B7B0 (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)