This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greenland, a WikiProject related to the nation of Greenland. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.GreenlandWikipedia:WikiProject GreenlandTemplate:WikiProject GreenlandGreenland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arctic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Arctic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArcticWikipedia:WikiProject ArcticTemplate:WikiProject ArcticArctic
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alaska, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Alaska on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AlaskaWikipedia:WikiProject AlaskaTemplate:WikiProject AlaskaAlaska
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change
Latest comment: 2 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
It states in Characteristics that polar bears are dichromats and lack the cones for green. This was changed sometime since last August, but I haven’t figured out the revision history interface to figure out when.
Mammalian dichromats have cones sensitive to more-or-less blue and more-or-less green, but lack cones sensitive to more-or-less red. If polar bears lacked green-sensitive cones, they would be monochromats, so this is likely vandalism.
The previous text mentioned blue-violet and yellow-green, but lacking a reference, I think it is best simply to specify that they are dichromats, which is linked. Applying human color terms to peak sensitivities in nanometers is somewhat subjective, and unless the specific peaks for polar bears, or at least for Ursidae, have been measured, it’s less than useful.
I’d fix it, but I haven’t done much editing in many years, and I don’t want to just jump into a semi-protected article, especially when the bulk of recent edits have been by a small group of editors. Curtis Clark (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
The source says that polar bears have L (for yellow but I think this is an error, it should be red) and S cone cells (for blue-violet) and that "humans have an additional cone in the middle that is most sensitive to green, giving us trichromatic vision". LittleJerry (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
I found this reference by Peichl. It states that polar bears have L- and S-cones. They don't have M-cones. This seems to be a feature of semi-aquatic mammals including river otters and pygmy hippotamuses. Axl¤[Talk]18:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Under the title 'Relationship with humans: Conflict' it says, "...polar bears, specifically subadults...". Most of the younglings who get into conflicts with humans, are male (may be connected to them being 'hormonal teenage boys' and needing more food due to their size). Perhaps it could say: "...polar bears, mostly subadult males...".
Thank you for your attention. Lycaon Pictus Hyaenidae (talk) 19:20, 25 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Not done: "specifically" and "mostly" mean different things. If you have reason to believe that the latter is more accurate, then you need to explain why. M.Bitton (talk) 00:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
In characteristics, when they are describing the animal fattening up, please mention how the fat is called blubber.
CONTEXT: I changed the Wikipedia page for blubber to include polar bears (it didn't before). It's important because few animals have blubber, so its a particular characteristic. 174.17.16.40 (talk) 20:46, 30 August 2025 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Commentary by a professional scientist about a recently published scientific paper noting that the findings of this paper have been misrepresented in popular press accounts about it. Adding this as a heads-up to watch out for edits citing the press misrepresentations, rather than the original study - MPF (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2025 (UTC)Reply
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale..svg){kind=icon}
.svg){kind=small}
Done --Kuhni74 (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Not done: "specifically" and "mostly" mean different things. If you have reason to believe that the latter is more accurate, then you need to explain why. M.Bitton (talk) 00:27, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
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. You need to provide the exact wording of your proposed change, and a reliable source. Day Creature (talk) 21:06, 30 August 2025 (UTC)