Talk:Orca/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

White Gladis orca should it be a whole page or mentioned?

Well, you can already buy a White Gladis tee shirt. Are we witnessing White Gladis becoming a folk hero? White Gladis is the name given to a single orca that many reports claim as being the orca that began the trend of attacking small vessels especially sailboats. According to an organization tracking the attacks by date there were 24 recorded attacks in May 2023 alone. See external link to map here. Until about last week, the name White Gladis has been picked up by mostly the fringe news organizations like the Daily Mail.

Now CNN has picked up the story and name too.

Experts believe White Gladis may have suffered a “critical moment of agony”, such as colliding with a boat or becoming entrapped during illegal fishing, which altered her behaviour in a “defensive” fashion.

“That traumatised orca is the one that started this behaviour of physical contact with boats,” Dr Lopez Fernandez told Live Science.

There are currently two relevant pages...Orca and Orca attacks

My position is that attacks upon 500 vessels certainly deserves mention on the main Orca page. However, anything beyond confirmed documentation enters the realm of speculation. No one can prove why the attacks began and attribute it to just one orca. Therefore, I don't think this form of speculation can appear on the main orca page.

White Gladis was already added onto the page Orca attacks. I am mixed upon inclusion of the name upon that page. But I have not moved to remove it because of speculation.

What I am most in favor of is the creation of an entire new page dedicated to White Gladis....i.e. White Gladis orca.

Thoughts?Pbmaise (talk) 15:15, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Better wording for section of threats to humans in opening

The sentence "Wild orcas are not considered a threat to humans, and no fatal attack on humans has ever been documented." doesn't read well for me. In particular I missed the "Wild" at the beginning which is key for correct understanding of the second half. Also the passive construction "are not considered" could be considered 'weasel words'. I think something like "Orcas are not usually a threat to humans, and no fatal attack has ever been documented in their natural habitat." would be an improvement. Thoughts? Eluchil404 (talk) 06:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Eluchil404, I agree. LittleJerry (talk) 12:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Done. Eluchil404 (talk) 05:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Wolf should be linked to Sinonyx a carnivorous artiodactyl which was the ancestors of whales

"wolves of the sea" should be linked to Sinonyx a carnivorous artiodactyl (Mesonychid) also called "wolf on hoofs" 103.226.243.133 (talk) 10:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

That would not be appropriate for this article, nor for the place where "wolf" is mentioned. - UtherSRG (talk) 13:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

There is also the problem of how mesonychids are not artiodactyls to begin with.Mr Fink (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Surfer Bitten claim needs a source

You cannot make claims like this without citing a primary source. This needs to be deleted until it can be cited. 76.93.232.99 (talk) 20:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

The source at the end of the sentence supports the surfer part of the sentence too. "There has never been a documented fatal killer whale attack on a human. The only relatively well-documented bite was one suffered by a surfer in California in the early 1970s" Schazjmd (talk) 20:58, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

If you'd like to do more research, the surfer's name was Hans Kretschmer, and it happened in 1972. Here's the contemporary news report from The Los Angeles Times: Whale Takes Bite From Surfer's Leg. Schazjmd (talk) 21:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

New Speciesbox image?

Per Morin et al. (2024), Orcinus has been split. The existing Speciesbox image depicts the transient population, now Orcinus rectipinnus. I'm not entirely sure which image would be the best replacement, or if it needs to be replaced at all, but I thought it'd be a good idea to bring it up. Borophagus (talk) 14:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

For mammals, we wait until secondary sources pick up the work of primary sources. Typically, this means waiting until the new species appears in ASM's MDD, so I'm going to revert your recent changes. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Wasn't aware of that requirement. Borophagus (talk) 17:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

No worries. Wikipedia is a simple complex. ;) - UtherSRG (talk) 17:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

And if they are split, this article would be about the genus Orcinus so the current picture would still be appropriate. LittleJerry (talk) 01:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

MDD Update

ASM's MDD now has both O. ater and O. rectipinnus listed, though acknowledges that O. orca remains paraphyletic. Meanwhile, the Society for Marine Mammalogy (considered a taxonomic authority on marine mammals) recognizes them as subspecies until further research clarifies their status. Separate pages for resident and Bigg's types wouldn't be difficult, at least, but this page might need to be changed. It could be moved to Orcinus and discuss just the genus, which would require a separate O. orca page. Or it could remain as-is (with added information on these recent taxonomic proposals) until there's a clearer picture of what researchers are using. YellowstoneLimestone (talk) 04:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

It's only a matter of time that the paraphyly will get resolved once further research on the other types are done. If we split the two taxa off into their own articles, we could use the common names for the three subspecies SMM adopted but with "orca" instead of "killer whale." So "resident orca," "Bigg's orca," and "common orca." Macrophyseter | talk 19:09, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

It does seem that we are nearing the time to make a significant taxonomic update here. It would be good to have the paraphyly sorted out, but with MDD being updated, I have no strong objection left. I suggest making this page to be about both the genus and the paraphyly, while information about the two new species can be their own articles. Once the paraphyly is resolved, we can then erect appropriate new articles and make this one to be only about the genus. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

As for name, I actually think we should just use the scientific name for the species articles, and continue to use 'orca' for the genus article; the species' common names aren't that common. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

I would disagree with the uncommonality of the common name. Both resident and Bigg's/transient (latter being rapidly replaced by the former) were exclusively used to describe the two groups by both scientists and laypeople familiar with them since they were recognized in the 70s. I was also curious regarding adopting full species status instead of subspecies; given that SMM accepted only subspecies status, and there's a good chance that other scientists are going to follow that lead for the time being.

If we used the common names for the articles, then it would grant flexibility for changing between species/subspecies in the taxobox. I suppose that "common orca" is indeed an invention of SMM, but I think a similar situation happened with common bottlenose dolphin and the article just accepted it anyways with a note? Alternatively, we could temporarily keep O. orca as "Orca" and Orcinus as is; I recall having seen a similar precedent of one species taking the base name without any adjectives, but am still trying to look for it again. Macrophyseter | talk 23:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Longevity in captivity vs in the wild

Two studies with opposite conclusions are cited on this subject, but the findings of one of these are retold extensively and stated as fact, while those of the other one are only briefly noted, sandwiched in the middle of the exposition of the findings of the first study, and they are explicitly attributed as the position of its authors only. If this is the only material available, the exposition should be more even-handed, with an equal level of detail and comparable information from both studies and with both positions being explicitly attributed rather than any one of them being presented as the truth. Of course, it is possible that the first study reflects the position predominating among researchers in the field and the second one is isolated, but if so, it should be possible to demonstrate that with more references. 62.73.72.3 (talk) 10:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Section on threats in intro needs sources

TL;DR The sentence in the intro naming 5 threats to orca populations needs citations.

The section at the beginning has no sources while making 5 factual claims (about things that are threats to orca populations). The one specifically that caused me to doubt and made me think to check was the one about capture for marine mammal parks -- With tens of thousands of animals in the wild, and very few such parks with only a few orca each, I didn't see how this could ever be a threat to population numbers. I looked it up, and it turns out, the claim is support by NOAA! So I will add the source for that claim. Unfortunately I don't have the time to research the other 4. Help would be appreciated. WiggyWamWam (talk) 03:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

The relevant information is in Orca#Conservation. I would agree that marine mammal capture is likely a small issue compared to the others for the global population, although it may be a local issue. CMD (talk) 03:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

It is indeed an issue concerning certain smaller populations. The Morrison Man (talk) 08:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

It turns out that while numbers in the North are fine, the Southern resident pods were absolutely decimated by capture for marine mammal parks. WiggyWamWam (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Hey, User:LittleJerry! I appreciate the edit (you removed my citation because it was in the lead), but I believe it wasn't the correct choice here: Citations aren't needed in the lead when the info occurs later in the article, but from what I'm seeing the info (that capture for marine mammal parks was a major threat to Orca populations) isn't included later in the article. If I'm reading this right, the article after the lead only discusses captivity in terms of its effect to the orcas and doesn't include that capture is a threat to local populations. With this and the relevant guidelines in mind, it seems to me the citation should stay or the information should be incorporated into the article in mind. Let me know if you think I'm wrong. WiggyWamWam (talk) 12:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Put it in the body. LittleJerry (talk) 20:03, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Etymology of scientific name

Bit discussed above, but this article and Orcinus mentions that "The genus name Orcinus means 'of the kingdom of the dead', or 'belonging to Orcus'." after one book and website. However, editor @Kingfiser: pointed out that this have no evidence that the name is related to Orcus. Since etymology is not mentioned in the original paper, and there is no information such as a reliable paper or other information source that says this scientific name is related to Orcus, I don't think article should have such ambiguous information. However, I am not aware of any other references available on the English version of Wikipedia, so I am thinking about how to deal with this. Anyone have opinion? Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 08:16, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the discussion. I previously cited this information on my blog, but I would like to add a clarification here regarding the etymology of Orcinus.

ICZN (2000) states that Orcinus is derived from orca in the Code. See the Code online, Chapter 7, Art. 30.1.1 example. This provides one basis of opinion that Orcinus is directly derived from Latin orca, rather than Orcus, even though Fitzinger (1860:204) did not specify its etymology in the original paper.--Kingfiser (talk) 09:32, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for information! Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 04:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Unscientific claim in "Naming" section.

"Orcas, despite being dolphins, are commonly called 'killer whales' due to a mistranslation of the Spanish 'asesino de ballenas' (literally 'whale killer'), reflecting their historical predation on whales."

This claim is rather problematic cause "dolphins" and "whales" are popular names. They aren't meant to reflect taxonomic conditions. Especially the word "whale" has no clear definition, between baleen whales, sperm whales and beaked whales.

On top of that, the source itself (https://us.whales.org/whales-dolphins/facts-about-orcas/) is pretty problematic. It claims orcas to have been called "ballenas asesinas" (killer whales), so the "mistranslation" theory is out of thin air, then it says that "Orcinus translates to ‘of the kingdom of the dead,’ (not it doesn't, it means "the one related to orcus") and orca refers to a kind of whale (you don't say), then it goes on to say "We know that orcas are top predators, yes, but not the vicious ‘whale killers’ that the ancient mariners thought them to be." which is purely a personal comment, and possibly a factually wrong one. 79.166.36.186 (talk) 07:55, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the claims themselves are correct, but I agree that this is a very weak source to hang the section on. The etymology of both "orca" and "killer whale" would benefit from some dedicated attention, using more reliable sources. From a quick look, it's however going to be something of a hodgepodge of conflicting interpretations. Here is the Online Etymology Dictionary basing "orca" on French "orque", sea monster, while Etymology Online goes off on a surprising tangent concerning testicles. This may take some work. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:56, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

To be honest, I think the theory about the name "killer whale" originating from Spanish for "whale killer" is kind of doing acrobatics with the animal's name. And many sources, including this one, do this as an active attempt to stigmatize "killer whale" as a stereotype and exonerate the animals for being carnivores. It's like political correctness for cetaceans. 79.166.36.186 (talk) 14:48, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed that whale denialism had crept back into this article. It's been there since 8 February 2022 (the article was moved from killer whale to orca on 2 February 2022). The claim is not in the article when it was last reviewed for featured article status (in 2010).

There are a lot of sites on the internet that make the claim "orcas are actually dolphins" (just Google that phrase, or look through the archives of this talk page), but is misleading (and utter nonsense if the claim is extended to say that "orcas are not whales"). In everyday English usage, whales are large cetaceans, and smaller cetaceans are referred to as porpoises or dolphins (or pilot whales). Orcas are larger than other members of the Delphinidae; there is nothing wrong with calling them whales (especially since pilot whales are also delphinids, and the internet is far more quiet about them being "not whales").

The everyday English usage of whale/dolphin/porpoise makes whales (if orcas are included) polyphyletic. Everyday English usage isn't subject to a cladistic preference for monophyletic groups. Toothed whales are paraphyletic if dolphins are excluded. So even if there was a reason to subject everyday English usage to cladistic preferences, "orcas are not whales" doesn't hold up cladistically. Plantdrew (talk) 17:38, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

I've been low-level annoyed with the forced dolphin/whale distinction for some time, but it's not something I felt like digging in for. I certainly wouldn't mind revisiting the phrasing. - Re asesina ballenas, I've just spent another twenty minutes looking around the web, and there's plenty of mid/low quality sources that all repeat the claim. Many of these are slightly better than the current source (e.g. mention in a Nature news feature), so it could at least be swapped out at ~ the same level. I have however been unable to find something really reliable, like an etymological analysis :/ On the side, pretty nice one here for the origin of the term "grampus" wrt the orca; will see to adding that. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 12:21, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

I’m new to editing Wikipedia so I’m not sure what the protocol would be on a locked article, but is there any way we could change this? Perhaps to something like: “Orcas are also commonly known as killer whales” and just leave it at that. After all, the official Society for Marine Mammalogy lists them under that name: https://marinemammalscience.org/science-and-publications/list-marine-mammal-species-subspecies/. The word “despite” tacitly perpetuates the oft-repeated but untrue claim that orcas aren’t actually whales, and as others have mentioned, it is incredibly difficult to find a reliable source for the claim that “killer whale” is a mistranslation. I think Wikipedia could go a long way in finally fixing the misconception amongst the public that orcas are “dolphins, not whales”. Orcinusozymandias (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2025

Please change the misspelling of 'seldom' in the first sentence in the second paragraph of the 'Characteristics' section. Onion baker (talk) 00:23, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

changed it to rarely since seldom is not commonly used. Sniper3d107 (talk) 06:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Already done jlwoodwa (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Can you explain how to do this so I can do this in the future? I don't know how to do it. 😅 Sniper3d107 (talk) 18:27, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Well?

File:Orca sexual dimorphism.png

Description issues, - FlightTime (open channel) 22:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Hey Flighttime.

Sorry for engaging in an edit war with you(I have never heard of this). 😓

As your comment about the "top and bottom," I believe using these terms can help contribute to consistency and clarity.

However, I’m open-minded and would appreciate it if you could explain why you feel that it might not be necessary to be there. Sniper3d107 (talk) 23:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

You state in your edit comment "Don't need to state the obvious"

In the description it says "Sexual dimorphism between male (top) and female killer whales. Pectoral fins, dorsal fin, and flukes are larger in adult males."

It says "Pectoral fins, dorsal fin, and flukes are larger in adult males."

This can obviously indicate that the individual at the top is male. Should we remove "(top)"?

Note: If this comes across as mocking, please know that I do not intend to mock you. Sniper3d107 (talk) 13:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

this is also why I would add it.Sniper3d107 (talk) 11:59, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

"Mistranslation of Spanish" claim

From what I can see in the article history, a similar claim was added many years ago, removed in 2019 as having never been reliably sourced, and re-added last November, in an unexplained edit in which no sources were provided . It is obviously absurd. No significant language contacts have ever existed between Spanish and English-speaking whalers, and there is, as far as I am aware, no other comparable claim of any word or phrase coming via such a route. I strongly suspect that any mentions of this claim on the internet at large are from gullible people who read it on Wikipedia. Kahvey (talk) 21:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

My bad I didn't see this.

This is why I believe this is the most accepted explanation: while we may not know the exact truth behind it, many sources say the name “killer whale” originally came from “whale killer” and was eventually flipped.

KPassionate, a marine biologist on YouTube, says around the 3:30 mark that the name got translated into “killer whale”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIwjehSYKJg

Live Science notes that the name morphed into killer whale over time:https://www.livescience.com/27431-orcas-killer-whales.html

SeaWorld says the name was switched to “killer whale”: https://seaworld.org/animals/all-about/killer-whale/classification

Wild Orca agrees that the name morphed into killer whale:https://www.wildorca.org/ask-an-expert/why-are-orcas-called-killer-whales-when-they-seem-so-friendly/

The Center for Whale Research explains that the name originated from Spanish whalers who called them “whale killers” after observing them hunt large whales. Over time, the term got flipped:

https://www.whaleresearch.com/copy-of-about-orcas

Here is a person on Reddit saying this statement:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amazing/comments/1i9ewq9/comment/m91u281

On Quora:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-reason-that-the-orca-is-called-a-killer-whale-instead-of-a-killer-dolphin

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-call-them-killer-whales-when-they-are-types-of-dolphins

There may be other theories, but this version seems to be the most accepted, and the pattern across sources is consistent. I’d be interested to see evidence that this is a false claim. Sniper3d107 (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Another source: https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.5212899 Sniper3d107 (talk) 18:03, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

It might not be right because we don’t know for sure, so it’s not that absurd.

Also another source

https://www.eaglewingtours.com/articles/why-are-they-called-killer-whales/#:~:text=So%2C%20it's%20no%20surprise%20that,got%20flipped%20to%20killer%20whales.

We don’t have to add it, but you saying "absurd" seems kinda offensive. Sniper3d107 (talk) 18:08, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Any source that says that they are "dolphins, not whales" is too absurd to cite (not all of the sources listed above make that claim, but some do). Plantdrew (talk) 00:31, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Perhaps we should consider ignoring this issue. There are two discussions about it, and there is 2 sides. However, we do know(I think) that it originated from ancient sailors observing them hunting whales. I could let this go if you say the words. Sniper3d107 (talk) 18:23, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The specific text that I removed and you put back was "commonly called 'killer whales' due to a mistranslation of the Spanish "asesino de ballenas" (literally ”whale killer”)". You're giving me a load of sources for a different claim that I haven't ever questioned. Why did you put back a claim that there was a mistranslation of the Spanish "asesino de ballenas" (literally ”whale killer”)? Kahvey (talk) 20:40, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I added it back because the phrase “killer whale” being a flipped or morphed version of “whale killer” (from Spanish “asesina de ballenas”) is widely said(or what I have seen). While I understand your point about mistranslation, I believe the phrasing reflects a historical misunderstanding or rewording that happened over time.

Many of the sources I shared point to the idea that Spanish whalers observed orcas preying on large whales and called them “asesina de ballenas” which probably meant to them killer of whales, (as they saw them hunt larger whales). This phrase seems to have been translated or interpreted as “whale killer,” which later got flipped into “killer whale.” It may not have been a direct mistranslation, but rather a linguistic evolution or reinterpretation over time, which is what I was trying to said.

I hope this cleared stuff up. Sniper3d107 (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Which specific sources mention that Spanish phrase? I do not see it in any of the sources you've posted here. Kahvey (talk) 21:09, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

As it’s not explicitly stated, it’s implied.

In Spanish, “asesina de ballenas” literally translates to “whale killer,” or, as the Europeans likely meant, “killer of whales.”

The only source I see that they called orcas killer whales is https://us.whales.org/whales-dolphins/facts-about-orcas/#:~:text=Why%20are%20orcas%20called%20'killer,what%20would%20you%20call%20them?

"They called orcas ballena asesina, or ‘killer whale.’ Sniper3d107 (talk) 21:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Even the Spanish wiki talks about it.

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orcinus_orca

"En español el término orca aparece en la traducción del licenciado Geronimo de Huerta de "la historia natural" de Plinio el viejo en 1603.[14]​[15]​ El término de «asesina-ballenas» fue acuñado por balleneros españoles en el siglo xviii al observarlas atacar y matar cetáceos grandes.[16]​ De ahí pasó al inglés, en el que el término fue erróneamente traducido como «killer whales», «ballenas asesinas» (en lugar de «whale killers»), término que fue posteriormente adoptado en español como ballena asesina.[17]​"

Translated:

"In Spanish, the term orca appears in Geronimo de Huerta's translation of Pliny the Elder's "Natural History" in 1603.[14][15] The term "whale killer" was coined by Spanish whalers in the 18th century after observing them attacking and killing large cetaceans.[16] It then passed into English, where the term was erroneously translated as "killer whales" (instead of "whale killers"), a term that was later adopted in Spanish as ballena asesina.[17]"

I don't know anymore 😭. We can keep the article as it is if you want. Sniper3d107 (talk) 21:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikis are not reliable. Nor are random people on reddit, posts on quora, or youtube videos. No reliable source that I know of contains the claim that whalers translating Spanish badly is the origin of the name "killer whale". If you know different, post it. Kahvey (talk) 21:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

If CWR is reliable,

https://www.whaleresearch.com/copy-of-about-orcas

“The name killer whale originated from the Spanish whaler’s term "whale killer," based on their observations of orcas hunting other types of whales.”

In Spanish, “whale killer” is either asesino/a de ballenas or asesino/a ballenas. Sniper3d107 (talk) 21:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Here's one from 2016, idk if it's reliable.

https://oceanadventures.co.za/orcas/

"The name originates from the mistranslation of the 18th century Spanish name “asesina de ballenas” which directly translates to killer of whales, which is what could have been observed – pods of orcas hunting whales" Sniper3d107 (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The first one does not mention the phrase "asesina de ballenas". The second is, I am sure, directly copied from Wikipedia. Scholarly sources predating Wikipedia should be easy to find if there is any basis whatsoever to the claim. Kahvey (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

The first one doesn’t explicitly mention it, but as I mentioned in that message,

“In Spanish, ‘whale killer’ is either asesino/a de ballenas or asesino/a ballenas.”

CWR states, “The name killer whale originated from the ‘Spanish’ whaler’s term "whale killer," based…"

Sniper3d107 (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Looking at the "Unscientific claim in "Naming" section."

It states "It claims orcas to have been called "ballenas asesinas" (killer whales), so the "mistranslation" theory is out of thin air"

Which was then used a lot (or what people believed to be true), this is why I heard it everywhere, and believed it was true.

Do you have any proof that it originated from ancient fishermen? (I haven’t seen any scientific evidence yet.) Sniper3d107 (talk) 23:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)