This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theAmerican bison article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books ·news ·scholar ·free images ·WP refs) ·FENS ·JSTOR ·TWL |
Archives:1Auto-archiving period:3 months ![]() |
![]() | This article iswritten inAmerican English, which has its own spelling conventions (color,defense,traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from othervarieties of English. According to therelevant style guide, this should not be changed withoutbroad consensus. |
![]() | This![]() It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
![]() | There is arequest, submitted by Catfurball, for anaudio version of this article to be created. For further information, seeWikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: "Important". |
This article is the subject of aneducational assignment at University of British Columbia supported by theWikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are availableon the course page.
Above message substituted from{{WAP assignment}}
on 14:28, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Although a minor issue, the picture on the left currently states "wild bison and calf" when it is plain to someone who can identify sex that the two bison in question are an adult male, and and adult female bison.
The main reference for the older census sizes of bison are from reference 95 (Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife (January 1965). "The American Buffalo". Conservation Note. 12.).I think it is slightly miscited since it is (from what I can tell) from 1977 and can be linked in full text here:https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31822016984015&view=1up&seq=1Further is is not a good reference or source for this number - at least not stated as a fact in this wiki article. The text reads: "At their peak (probably before the discovery of America) it is though that they may have numbered 60 or 70 millions."Rasmus.87 (talk)10:50, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
...the logic behind "400,000-500,000 [in 2010]" transitioning into "31,000 [9 years later in 2019]" yet that's not critically endangered or endangered in reference to the original "[double digit] millions"?173.80.7.142 (talk)01:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]