This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bhutan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bhutan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BhutanWikipedia:WikiProject BhutanTemplate:WikiProject BhutanBhutan
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia
Tiger is within the scope of WikiProject Myanmar, a project to improve all Myanmar related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Myanmar-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.MyanmarWikipedia:WikiProject MyanmarTemplate:WikiProject MyanmarMyanmar
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand
I plan on changing/rewritting the culture section into a smaller subsection and moving the information currently there to a new article "Cultural depictions of tigers". LittleJerry (talk) 18:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest merging Tigers in Chinese culture and Tigers in Korean culture into Cultural depictions of tigers. Overall, I don't think this article is too badly off, but there is definitely room for improvement. There are three fossil subspecies not mentioned at all, and there's the elephant in the room of the number of subspecies- the IUCN says two, but the majority of recent papers I've seen go with nine. I'm not sure there needs to be a separate subsection just for size, and there's a bit too much on the color variations given each has their own (admittedly poor) article. I'd prefer more of the Description section to talk about other parts of the animal than just the size and color/pattern. Conservation section's a mess.
My plan is to comb through each section and subsection, making sure the text accurately reflect the sources and making changes, trims and rewrites along the way. Don't have the energy to rewrite from scratch like I did with polar bear. LittleJerry (talk) 19:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your initial question, but thought that somebody else may want to press forward. But since you invite me directly : I'm on board. You and I are anyway the 2 main contributors. I agree to check the sections before nominating this for FA. – BhagyaMani (talk) 10:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't keep up with tiger research, but when I search "tiger subspecies" of Google Scholar I get a lot of papers that refer to nine subspecies. The 3 fossil subspecies are pretty obscure, alas.
I am considering opening discussion regarding the number of supporting articles: namely black tiger, life cycle of the tiger, tiger hunting, tiger conservation, and tiger attack, all of which I feel are unnecessary splits. Black tiger is mostly an exhaustive listing of sightings; the rest seem over-detailed.
Not quite ready yet, but will add some info on home range in Sumatra + India in the next few days, so that at least the main range countries are covered. Will also make a new map asap. – BhagyaMani (talk) 22:37, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BhagyaMani, going forward, you work on Conservation and Body Part Use (or maybe you'll replace the latter with "Threats"?). I'll look at the rest. I definitely want to rewrite the culture section. LittleJerry (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The current black tiger article is mostly a list of sightings and supposed sightings of black or mostly black tigers; there is exactly one scholarly source present. There is no evidence for the notability of "black tigers" as a group, so I suggest that discussion of them can be condensed into a single paragraph under Tiger#Colour variations. SilverTiger12 (talk) 23:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would support this. But I don't think we should move the "sightings" reports to this article. If there are more scientific papers on black tigers then sure. LittleJerry (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would count an article by RI Pocock in the Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society as a scholarly article. I've complete the citation with a link to BHL. There are several other JBNHS citations which could be valid if we can trace them properly. — Jts1882 | talk17:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to NOT moving all the many details from newspapers + websites in this page here. But maybe the ref to Pocock's article + one on the 'black' tigers in Simlipal NP, which I have in my library. — BhagyaMani (talk) 22:48, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I figured only a very small amount of information on black tigers would survive the merge- certainly not the exhaustive, non-encyclopedic list of sightings and births. SilverTiger12 (talk) 23:11, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LittleJerry: just a quick note. Siberian tigers don't weigh 306 kg; not even the largest ones. According to my own experience, male Siberians average 174 kg and females 113 kg, with both sexes having a maximum weight of 200 kg and 140 kg, respectively. The only Siberians that are likely to reach such weights are captive animals; I believe this table does not include weights from captive animals. The table should show the normal weight range of the tiger, and a 300 kg individual is not normal. Historically, yes, Siberians were the largest, but not anymore; the Bengal is now the largest big cat on average. Take my word for it. 20 upper (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The tiger is considered to be the largest living felid species, but there is some debate over averages compared to the lion. Since tiger populations vary greatly in size, the "average" size for a tiger may be less than a lion, while the biggest tigers are bigger than their lion counterparts."
This is somewhat unsatisfactory. Is it possible to make a more direct statement, something along the lines of
"The largest tigers, such as the Amur and Benagal tigers, are the largest living felids, although male lions can be larger than the smaller tigers from Southeast Asia."
And Ilyes toon, where to you get off acting like a bull in a China shop? Do you realize that this article is about tigers as a species and not just the Bengal tiger? The Bengal tiger being on average larger than the African lion does not mean tigers as a whole (including the Sumatran tiger) are on average bigger than lions. That's want the text you keep deleting is saying!!!!! And don't lie and say its "Information without a source". You didn't even check cite 43. LittleJerry (talk) 21:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a contributor to this article or the FAC, but regardless of Jts1882's attempted changes, I do see valid concerns with the current text. Is considered, some debate, and "average" put in scare quotes, are all WP:words to watch issues. The cited source doesn't state anything with certainty. If there are reliable authorities that say tigers are largest, say so and describe their methodology. Otherwise, it would be more neutral and verifiable to say e.g. The tiger is one of the two largest living felid species, along with the lion, though there is debate over how the two compare. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's my point. The source does not support the current statement "The tiger is considered to be the largest living felid species." It only says that the tiger and the lion are the two largest. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So there should be no trouble making a clearly worded statement supported by a reliable source, without the weaseley "is considered" wording, then? --Paul_012 (talk) 13:34, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My brother, you are misinterpreting my point. The argument I'm trying to make is that tigers should be mentioned as the largest cats (though with caution), as opposed to tigers and lions being stated as the two largest members. WolverineXI(talk to me)14:16, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source says It also commonly believed to be the biggest cat species alive today, although this claim is questionable. It is directly disputing the common belief. It would be dishonest to claim the source for a blanket statement like "is considered to be". I'll go ahead and change the wording to better reflect the source. Anyone should feel free to change it if there's another source that supports a more direct statement. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:54, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "largest living cat species native to Asia" bit is ambiguious confused me. I thought it was only the largest native to Asia until reading the short description — VORTEX3427 (Talk!) 07:50, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 09:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)