Talk:Seal

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Flutterby, seals do not have external ears (only sea lions do), and none of them have smooth skin; they are covered with fur. Karajou 17:15, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Hunted

Timber, I think the point 1990'sguy is trying to make is that, so what if seals are hunted? Many animals are, whether they be ostriches, alligators, salmon, or deer. By definition, environmentalists are going to try to stop all of this, to as great of an extent as they can. This is more the case with species considered to be endangered, but these are not their only focus.
It's also interesting that your one-sentence justification for this edit is an accusation against Conservapedia as a whole. If they are being hunted much more so than most other animals, I could certainly see some justification is writing a subsection on this article discussing the who/where/why of this, and perhaps specific laws and polices to restrict it. However, just dumping a vague sentence in the intro paragraph which could apply to hundreds of articles doesn't help anyone. Feel free to educate, but don't just make subtle attempts are promoting environmentalism and edit war over them. --DavidB4 (TALK) 19:28, 17 April 2019 (EDT)

I completely agree. User:Timber, your edits have a clear leftist bias, and you constantly edit war with administrators. I'm being extremely generous to you for the time being. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:33, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
Also, when User:Timber reverted me, he also reverted the several unrelated copyedits I made -- sloppy knee-jerk revert. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2019 (EDT) 1990'sguy I would apologize but I cannot find evidence for this claim. Timber (talk) 20:34, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
Please see this diff -- I removed two unnecessary duplicate spaces in the first paragraph and added a useful space near the bottom -- copyedits, but still separate nonetheless. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:21, 17 April 2019 (EDT)
I find these responses utterly confusing. This sentence adds to the confusion, "but don't just make subtle attempts are [at?] promoting environmentalism and edit war over them". My intention was to criticize the attempts by animal activists to deprive hardworking people an important source of income and part of their culture. If you both had shown just a little patient further edits would have made it clear This seems to me far more significant that whether or not seals are cute. But perhaps you both are vegans! There is a long article on the seal hunt on Wikipedia, in case you might wish to learn more. And please don't stereotype me and also don't exaggerate about edit-wars (this isn't true: "you constantly edit war with administrators" (plural?). I am making an effort to communicate with you 1990'sguy. I'm sorry if we got off on the wrong footing. Timber (talk) 20:10, 17 April 2019 (EDT)


To be clear, the point is not whether we support seal hunting or not...It's not that I'm specifically for or against it. My concern is that, whether intentional or not, that edit did not seem constructive, and it's not the first time. All we have to judge your intentions are your edits. If we misunderstood or jumped to conclusions, then fine--Perhaps we can improve on that. However, when we see odd, pointless, and/or suspicious edits, some skepticism seems to be in order. Please endeavor to make helpful, substantive additions. A stray (possibly suspicious) sentence added to the introduction of an article doesn't count. As I said, feel free to write a section on it if you wish--it's not that you can't speak on such things. It's the way you are doing it and your apparent attitude that we are concerned about. --DavidB4 (TALK) 21:08, 17 April 2019 (EDT)

Timber, please don't make an edit like this in the future: [1] It's inappropriate to edit other people's comments (this is also a Wikipedia rule). Your point is taken, though.

The issue here has nothing to do with the facts but rather the emphasis and relevance. There's nothing unique about seals being hunted -- pretty much every large mammal is hunted. "Animal activists" are too off-topic for this article. Also, see my comment here -- CP gets massive vandalism, and we're extremely vigilant as a result. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:21, 17 April 2019 (EDT)

The article is partly about the mammal and badly needs to be expanded. Seal fur has been a valuable commodity and seal meat is potentially an important source of protein, etc. It is an important concern, I am led to believe, of animal rights activists in the USA. It is also an source of income and of cultural values. That it is an significant subject isI indicated by the long article on the seal hunt on Wikipedia. Timber (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2019 (EDT)
It may be an important concern of animal "rights" activists, but they're a small group, and not one that's supportive of conservatism nor without double standards. If the article is going to be expanded, it needs to discuss the animal's habitat, biology, classification, species, etc., before even going into the hunting part (and once again, there's nothing exeptional about it). --1990'sguy (talk) 09:16, 18 April 2019 (EDT)

Image

I don't know very much about the kinds of seals, but I see that we already have an image of a Weddell seal: File:Weddel seal.jpg Is this a good one to add to this page, or should a better one be found elsewhere? --DavidB4 (TALK) 19:16, 22 April 2019 (EDT)

Preferably, what should happen is a different image per article. The Waddell seal image is fine where it's at, but there will be a different image uploaded when an article on Waddell seals is made. Karajou (talk) 03:17, 23 April 2019 (EDT)
Okay, that's fine with me. I just figured I'd mention it, since we could economize server space that way. It probably doesn't matter though. --DavidB4 (TALK) 15:26, 23 April 2019 (EDT)