Talk:Baboon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Flange of baboons

I know it sounds made up, but it is correct. A google search reveals the origin: [1] I added it, I just forgot to sign in at the time. --StoatBringer 23:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

baboons have brightly coloured bums, although they do not have brightly coloured poo/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.198.221 (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

non-hominoid apes?

The article starts by saying that baboons are, "primates: non-hominoid apes comprising the genus Papio, one of the 23 genuses of Old World monkeys." Looking at other pages describing taxonomy of primates it is clear that baboons are definitely old world monkeys. But the phrase "non-hominoid apes" is very confusing. Apes are members of the superfamily hominoidea, which includes great apes, lesser apes and gibbons. The smallest group that baboons and apes are both members of seems to be catarrhini, which is divided into old world monkeys (which includes baboons) and hominoidea (apes). So, one might expect that "hominoids" is synonymous with "apes". So what is a "non-hominoid ape"? I'm not saying it is wrong; I don't know one way or the other (I'm a physicist, not a biologist...). But if the term "non-hominoid ape" is correct then it needs some explanation since it seems like a contradiction. --Gleedadswell (talk) 22:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Not sure where that came from but I deleted it. Rlendog (talk) 02:40, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, you've removed it from the beginning, but it is still there in the second last sentence of the first paragraph, which says, "They are among the largest non-hominoid apes." I really don't have it in for this piece of terminology. But if it is correct then it needs explanation. I can't find a single use of the term "non-hominoid ape" outside of this article. Based on some reading elsewhere I think a statement which is true and less confusing is that baboons are among the largest non-hominoid primates (baboons and mandrills seem to be the largest non-hominoid primates). So I'm going to make an edit request to change the word "ape" in that sentence to "primate". I don't have edit privileges on this page or I would just do it myself. --Gleedadswell (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Which is bigger, a Baboon or a Drill

The article states that a Baboon can be up to 90 pounds and that the Mandrill and Drill are bigger. Then the article on the Mandrill says that the Mandrill is up to 60 pounds??? This would make the Baboon bigger. So which is it?

Kkinva68 20:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)kkinva68

Baboons in Egypt

There is a lot here which could be added... [http://touregypt.net/featurestories/baboons.htm] And which should prove to be of interest. - Ian Chattan 08:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

So why don't you add the information? - UtherSRG (talk) 14:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I think a lot more information could be added on Cultural Significance. I've started researching now!G1ggy 07:59, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I am not as good at it as you are, and my dyslexia is killing me.

Thanks for tidying up the link. Now that I see how easy it is to do I've done the other one above. Ian Chattan 14:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Early in the article the Baboon god is named Baba, while it is later referred to in the Culture section as Babi. As the second one has a link to an article on the topic and the first doesn't, I'm guessing the second is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MoogleDan (talk • contribs) 16:57, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

scholarly

I don't think "rear-ends" is very scholarly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.176.159.101 (talk • contribs) .

Changed to "rumps". - UtherSRG (talk) 03:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

attack people

Aren't Baboons vicious? I've heard stories of them attacking villages and killing people! -NAVIDIA 03:50, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Attacking people yes, and twice they've attempted to kidnap young children but I'm not sure about killing people.203.29.160.136 (talk) 05:01, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I think under the heading "Relationship with Humans" would be a good spot for cited expansion.o0drogue0o 17:36, 4 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by O0drogue0o (talk • contribs)

Conservation Status?

where is the conservation status for this animal?[[User:Cs1kh]] (talk) 11:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Only species or lower level articles get a conservation status. There are several species of baboon, so you'd have to look at each of those articles to see their conservation status. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Webcam

I added a link to a webcam of the Baboon enclosure at Knowsley Safari Park, Merseyside UK. Is this appropriate? Apologies if not.RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Male ownership of women

Baboons have no concept of private property, except of females. With their vampire-like canines, males rarely fight each other seriously ( when establishing places on the dominance hierarchy ) but males in the wild have been known to puncture and even crush their females skulls for the slightest of infractions.

This is from Carl Sagan's "Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors," which, I think, is a fairly reliable source, although it's made a few surprising blunders in other areas. I'd like to know more about this, and came here hoping to know just what sort of infractions the females die for committing, etc, but sadly there's no mention of this.

It would be great if someone in the know could expand the article a bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.128.254 (talk) 06:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I can find no search hits for any such behaviour. Killing or maiming a potential mate is generally speaking highly evolutionarily disincentivised. However, male baboons showing aggression towards females who may sexually engage with other males, or do so, is well documented. Sagan may have confused aggression towards females with infanticide by males, which is more or less common in baboons, depending on species. Samsara 08:30, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

"Flange of baboons"

A comedy sketch is not a reliable source. This term however, has been copied throughout the net as being truth, even ending up on QI. The source they cite, however, is an anonymous Amazon book review from an author who cites the book as authoritative, and I suspect that the description there derives from the sketch. Unless Smuts, the author of this book, or anyone else, can cite chapter and verse for this collective, it's apocryphal and unusable here. Rodhullandemu 00:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Like the use of the term "congress" to refer to a group of baboons, there is no reliable evidence that the term "flange" is used anywhere either. I have just done a Google Books search and the only results for "flange" as a plural noun for baboons, like the ones for "congress", are in published lists of plural nouns, mostly meant as brain-teasers for elementary school kids with titles like "How Much Does Your Head Weigh?" [[2]] and not exactly reliable sources. No academic journal anywhere in the English-speaking world refers to groups of baboons as either a "flange" or a "congress"— the definitive term is "troop", though the article might benefit from a sentence specifically pointing out "flange" and "congress" as fallacies. I am going to remove the use of the term "flange" for the time being. KDS4444^Talk 03:21, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Interaction (or social integration) with other animals (dogs)?

Baboons have also been known to incorporate dogs into their social groups. --Animals Like Us documentary [3]

The above was removed from the article by an anonip, while also citing another analysis [4]. Googling baboons + dogs also returns numerous results on this topic (including many news articles and at least one other video [5]).

There seems to be significant uncertainty about the nature of the interaction or social relationship between dogs and baboons, but what seems to be beyond dispute is that regardless of its precise nature people do find it notable. Cesiumfrog (talk) 04:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Urban baboons?

If there are permanent urban populations as alleged by one IP editor, we would like some reliable sources showing this. While much of the material found on YouTube does not qualify as RS, I did follow the suggestion of that editor, and the material found there does not convince me that baboons can be properly considered urban animals. In any case, the question arises whether particular species should be marked (as applicable) rather than the genus, as the classification, if correct, is likely to not apply to all members. In any case, I don't think it should happen without a reliable source. Samsara 07:46, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

The original source justifying inclusion in the urban wildlife article is [6], and is specific to the chacma baboon. The article can probably be read different ways, but it does emphasise conflict, which in my mind gives chacma baboon the same "urbanity" as African elephants, who also come into villages to dig up crops and are not appreciated or even particularly tolerated. Samsara 08:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't think that the Chacma baboon can be classified as urban. It essentially lives in native forests and invades urban areas in search of food, with significant conflict.[7] Urban wildlife should be defined as those primarily living within the urban environment. I am more familiar with Australian wildlife, and the editor in question has made many most inexpert and frustrating alterations, essentially little better than guesswork. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 08:38, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Jameel the Saluki - the next question is whether the corresponding section in urban wildlife, specifically urban wildlife#Africa, should be changed or removed - the current phrasing "adapted remarkably well in raiding homes for food" seema a little optimistic, and the source is neither a well known news organisation nor a scholarly journal. Samsara 08:58, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

I've made some changes putting the section into context. The section, as well as the whole article, is a bit of a mess. I was tempted to delete it, but the section is a long-standing edit, no doubt put in in the hope that someone, someday would write it up properly. I could write a section for the Australia section, but not for any other and certainly not the Africa section. Jameel the Saluki (talk) 11:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - that's a definite improvement. Samsara 14:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2017

Amumucjsdabrhieuwhgaupif (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: The request is empty. Please describe the changes in a "change X to Y" format. Gulumeemee (talk) 03:34, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 July 2018

{{subst:trim

-

 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. Dolotta (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Hardstucked garbage?

Why does the phrase "Hardstucked garbage" appear when I play the baboon call audio at the top of the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:777C:C750:3013:D469:D583:DDD4 (talk) 15:07, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2019

The second last sentence of the first paragraph says,

"They are among the largest non-hominoid apes."

Since "hominoid" seems to be synonymous with "ape" the term "non-hominoid ape" is very confusing. What seems to be true is that baboons are among the largest non-hominoid primates (mandrills and baboons are the largest primates outside of superfamily Hominoidea). So I propose simply replacing the word "ape" in this sentence with the word "primate". The sentence would then read,

"They are among the largest non-hominoid primates." Gleedadswell (talk) 15:32, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done I agree that "non-hominoid ape" is confusing. Gulumeemee (talk) 10:20, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

In the predator section jaguar should be changed to leopard.

Nardnearp (talk) 13:14, 23 March 2021 (UTC)Jaguars are New World. The footnote refers to an article about leopard predation.

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2019

Sheckgod (talk) 15:34, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

baboons can run faster than most humans!

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Sceptre (talk) 01:05, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2021

Many people hate them Bloodcraver (talk) 03:56, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

stupid monkeys

 Not done: @Bloodcraver: This is original research and an unsupported, vague attribution. — Lauritz Thomsen (talk) 04:43, 10 August 2021 (UTC)