Talk:List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Extinction Low‑importance

	This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Animals Low‑importance

List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

On 13 September 2012, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of extinct fauna of Australia. The result of the discussion was not moved.

On 1 November 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of Australian species extinct in the Holocene. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn.

Untitled

Hi, have you checked out: List_of_extinct_animals?

~ender 2003-04-13 03:46 MST

Yes, Ender. You might remeember me doing a large cut & paste job on it not long after you started it. Lots more to do there. And here. As ever. Always too many things to do, never enough time to do them all. :( Tannin

I was wondering if there should be some sort of addition of the role of humans in the extinctions in Australia. Nathan GO THE DO DO

Move to List of extinct Australian animals?

Since this is a list and other countries have articles of the format List of extinct XXXX animals should it be considered for moving? Alan Liefting 20:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

When I get around to it I'd like to expand this article so it was less like a list and more like an article, so I'd prefer that is was left where it is currently.--nixie 22:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is moved to comply with accepted standards, you can still work on it. That's the point of having a wiki. Anon user comment.
I can see a case for two articles: Extinct Australian animals and List of extinct Australian animals. The former would be a discussion on it and the latter is an outright list. Lists can get long and unweildly - not sure if this would be the case for Aussie animals. Alan Liefting 23:41, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gastric brooding without hyphens

I removed the hyphens from the gastric brooding frog in order to make it consistent with links on other pages, currently Myobatrachidae, Frog and Eastern banjo frog. If you disagree, please change the hyphenation on these other pages, too! - Samsara 21:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zosterops albogularis

Is this bird endangered or is it extinct? The wikipedia page for the bird states that it is endangered, so if this claim is truth it should be removed from this page. Any insight?

Please see the discussion on the species page. --Peta 02:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does noone car anymore?

Noone cares about animals anymore. The few people that do should take a stand and start a petition about animal abuse and cruelty and stuff like that. It is really sad that heaps of animals are now extinct becaus eof us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothic chic (talk • contribs) 10:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article lacks citation

This paragraph,

"it is worth making special mention of the three great human-introduced killer species: the European rabbit, the European Red Fox, and the domestic cat. Although many other introduced species have played a destructive role, so far these three have been far and away the most significant."

needs to be cited. According to whom are the rabbit, red fox and cat the biggest causes of extinction in Aus? Not saying that these species are not the biggest a citation would be appreciated :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.39.51.116 (talk) 04:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged it for a cite. But given that the article is a list of extinct animals, is it even appropriate to include the supposed prime contributors in the lead? Also when the article has "...is worth making special mention... " it seems to be very much a value judgement, which is out of place in an encyclopedia.MurfleMan (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've now removed the mention, if it is to be reinstated, it would need a cite, and a reasonable argument for inclusion. MurfleMan (talk) 00:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. There doesn't seem to be a compelling reason for differing from other lists of extinct animals. --BDD (talk) 16:48, 20 September 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

List of extinct animals of Australia → List of extinct fauna of Australia – It should be moved from animals to fauna as it is more scientific, and it links with List_of_extinct_flora_of_Australia. TerryAga (talk) 12:05, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:NOTJARGON #7 & 8 (Wikipedia is for a general readership and is not a work of science — "fauna" is more precise but "animals" is not wrong) and consistency (all of the other pages at Category:Lists of extinct animals by continent and Category:Lists of extinct animals by country use "animals"). Incidentally, List of extinct flora of Australia is the only member of Category:Lists of extinct plants that uses "flora" and even it was located at List of extinct Australian plants until an undiscussed move a few years back. — AjaxSmack 14:28, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 1 November 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. (closed by non-admin page mover) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 11:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene → List of Australian species extinct in the Holocene – I added New Guinea to the scope of the article back on 16 and 19 January 2023. Now I've changed my mind and would like to remove New Guinea from the scope of this article. New Guinea and Aru Islands extinctions should be relocated to List of Oceanian animals extinct in the Holocene. See below for details. Columbianmammoth (talk) 06:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I now realize that including New Guinea doesn't improve the article. Only a small number of the species I added represent New Guinea Island (including a beetle, a possum, and several BCE species). The great majority of the New Guinea species I transferred to this article (numerous birds and a few rodents) are from the Islands Region of Papua New Guinea, which is not technically part of Sahul. The map at the beginning of List of Oceanian animals extinct in the Holocene includes New Guinea as part of Melanesia, and on second thought that sounds like an appropriate place to include New Guinea extinctions. If New Guinea Island had astronomical numbers of extinct marsupials and native rodents (similar to Mainland Australia), it would be easier to justify including New Guinea in this list. But it seems like that just isn't the case. Columbianmammoth (talk) 06:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Part of me is hoping that someone will come to the defense of Sahul (Australia-New Guinea), but for the reasons I stated above I doubt that's going to happen. Columbianmammoth (talk) 06:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think it should be List of Sahul species extinct in the Holocene, and NG be returned here. The biographic divide includes NG and Wallacaea in Sahul. The Oceania article should be restricted to Zeelandia and the Pacific Islands, removing Sahul. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 11:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is one of those difficult cases where I agree with you in principle but feel obligated to point out Wikipedia's policies. I agree that Sahul ought to be the commonly used and recognized name for Earth's 7th continent including New Guinea (with Australia being reserved exclusively for the country of Australia), but that just isn't the case yet. Policies like WP:COMMONNAME discourage Wikipedia editors from being trendsetters. Also, if you truly believe that Sahul is the best name for the subject and have reliable sources, this is the wrong forum. Go start a merge discussion at Sahul and Australia (continent). The former is a paleogeography stub, while the latter is the main article on the Australian continent (Australia-New Guinea).

Also, Wallacea defines said region as the archipelago between the shelfs of Sunda and Sahul, excluding the Philippines. More specifically, Wallacea is the region between the Wallace Line and Lydekker Line. The Weber Line, which cuts through the middle of Wallacea, is one proposed dividing line between Asia and Australasia, with the lion's share of Wallacea going to Asia. (In other words, it's not correct to say that Wallacea is part of Sahul. Sahul is mainland Australia, Tasmania, and New Guinea.) Columbianmammoth (talk) 17:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The intro to List of Oceanian species extinct in the Holocene says that Australia-New Guinea, New Zealand, and Hawaii are listed in separate articles (which happened because Australia, New Zealand, and Hawaii have astronomical numbers of recent extinctions and thus have articles in their own right). Despite this restrictive definition of Oceania, List of Oceanian species extinct in the Holocene still manages to be a fairly long article, which is sad commentary on anthropogenic extinction.

The opinion I voiced in my original post from 1st November is that New Guinea would be a better fit for List of Oceanian species extinct in the Holocene because the huge number of extinct birds and rodents from the Islands Region of Papua New Guinea (relative to the small number of extinctions from New Guinea proper) merely clutters an article that should be about the astronomical number of recent extinctions from Australia.

~~Under this proposal, Australia, New Zealand, and Hawaii would retain their own separate articles, while New Guinea-related material would be transferred to the Oceania article.~~ If you disagree with me, the only decent alternative I can think of is the status quo, where the article is called List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene. Columbianmammoth (talk) 17:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As original poster. I decided to move material related to the Autonomous Region of Bougainville (North Solomon Islands) to join the rest of the Solomon Islands archipelago over in List of Oceanian species extinct in the Holocene while leaving New Guinea, the Aru Islands, and the Bismarck Archipelago in List of Australia-New Guinea species extinct in the Holocene. This relatively minor change addresses most of my original concerns about too much clutter in the Australia-New Guinea list while still respecting the fact that Australia-New Guinea forms a single continent. (On a related note, it appears that Bougainville/North Solomons may become an independent country before the end of the decade.) Columbianmammoth (talk) 18:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Komodo dragon

Hey, thanks for creating this fantastic article. Scientists recently discovered that Komodo dragons (Varanus komodoensis) once inhabited Australia. Roy Robert Hay (talk) 07:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]