Talk:List of domesticated animals

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of domesticated animals article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 45 days

Animals Mid‑importance

List of domesticated animals 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

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-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

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7

This page has archives. Sections older than 45 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:

[[Vicuña#Subspecies|Vicuña]] The anchor (#Subspecies) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

Gayal Removal

I propose the Gayal be removed from the list, but I would prefer someone with more experience do it. The wikipedia description for Gayal only lists it as "semi-domesticated," which should not be on this list. It is unsourced, even in that claim, and unsourced for date of domestication. This is a list of animals we have concrete domestication archaeological records on, and I guess modern well sourced exemplars. The Gayal fits neither description, best I can tell.Johnfromtheprarie (talk)

More semidomesticated cleanup

Now that we've gone through a round of deletions, I'd like to suggest another round of improvement: gathering citations for each taxon to demonstrate widespread commercial use. These can be taken from the animal's own articles where applicable. Every species that currently lacks a good citation (including if their article lacks citations) would be tagged with Template:Citation needed in the meantime - not deleted yet, but I think it should be clear where evidence of common human use is needed. Thoughts? Shuvuuia (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair to me. Though I wouldn't necessarily restrict it only to things with widespread *commercial* use, just... widespread human use that isn't either simple predation, or use of purely wild-caught animals (outside of the elephant exception). If there are a substantial number of hobby breeders of a particular pet, for example, I think that qualifies an animal even if there isn't particularly widespread actual commercial use. But, same basic idea. Tamtrible (talk) 10:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eagles

The article lists the Golden and Bald eagles under the "Tame, partially domesticated, and widely captive-bred animals" with the location listed for the Golden eagle as "Europe, North America, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Africa, Australia", and the Bald eagle location is "North America, Europe, Russia, Africa, Australia" and the purpose for both as "falconry, intercepting, pest control, show, pets"

These need to be edited for corrections. Various laws protect many birds beginning with the Lacey Act of 1900 (amended in 2008) and the Weeks–McLean Act of 1918.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 was the beginning of protection in the US and Canada. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 1940) included two eagles offering complete protection, with the only exceptions being by permits. The act is supported by international conventions with Canada, Japan, Mexico and Russia. The Golden eagle is critically Endangered in the Czech Republic and Albania, where future protection laws are likely.

references

management guidelines -- Otr500 (talk) 00:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to edit those entries. Our cleanup hasn't gotten that far, but I kind of suspected that those eagle entries would end up on the chopping block. Please, eg, check the pages for each animal, to see if there's evidence that they were historically captive bred, before deleting. Tamtrible (talk) 01:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bearded Dragon

Don't forget these pets as domesticated 2601:14B:4180:12E1:547D:ABF3:F64B:5409 (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elephants

Someone has once again submitted elephants as "partially domesticated", but this is not true, according to my +30 years research on captive elephants, published with database at my website Elephant Encyclopedia at https://www.elephant.se, a website used On Wikipedia on numerous articles as reference for elephant details. I definitely argue that "are at least somewhat altered from wild-type animals due to their extensive interactions with humans" can be applied on any individual elephant, since we have "altered" nothing. I have a few individuals in my database that are 8th or 9th generation, but this does NOT mean that ANYTHING with them is altered, and its too less time to provide any kind of indication of domestication, and apart from this, those elephants are fewer than 10 individuals. Elephants should absolutely be removed from that list, immediately. Dan Koehl (talk) 07:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]