Talk:Small Indian mongoose

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mammals Low‑importance 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 articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. India Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Nepal Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The distribution map does include southeastern Iran and a part of Iraq. The missing polygon over Saudia Arabia, Oman + Jordan is NOT a flaw of this page or this map. But perhaps one in the iucn rl assessment. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is a flaw on the assessment's part, yes, but the fact that the page uses the map is not something we can ignore. Pointing out a missing part of the map doesn't hurt. Ddum5347 (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nader (1989) about mammals of Saudi Arabia did not list this mongoose as occurring in country. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 16:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mallon & Budd (2011) conducted a workshop on Red Listing carnivores of the Arabian Peninsula, but pax did not list the small Indian mongoose in ANY country of the peninsula. I therefore think that the mention of Saudi Arabia + Oman in iucn RL assessment is erroneous. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 21:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How do we proceed from here then? Ddum5347 (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1][2] These sources list it as native to Saudi Arabia. Ddum5347 (talk) 17:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

None of these 2 indicate sources for this claim nor any locality record in country. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would they themselves not be sources? And how many other countries have locality records? Ddum5347 (talk) 17:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would not use these as sources. Will add locality records in other countries. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Ddum5347 (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Elmidae, Chipmunkdavis, Jts1882, and Enwebb: please advise how to handle this contradiction re distribution of the small Indian mongoose:

• Nader (1989) about mammals of Saudi Arabia did not list this mongoose as occurring in country
• Mallon & Budd (2011) compiled results of a workshop on Red Listing carnivores in the Arabian Peninsula, but pax did not list the small Indian mongoose in ANY country of the peninsula
• however, iucn red list assessors (2016) did list Saudi Arabia + Oman as range country, but withOUT showing these 2 countries in the map. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 07:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IUCN cites Handbook of the mammals of the world (Gilchrist et al. 2009) for its country list. However, this nature paper also cites Gilchrist et al. 2009 for a list of countries, without listing Saudi Arabia or Oman. I would treat it as an error in the IUCN text, unless someone has Gilchrist to hand. CMD (talk) 07:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you make the case well. The IUCN assessment seems an outlier. As further evidence the ASM-MDD has the range as Iraq|Iran|Afghanistan|Pakistan|India|Nepal|Bhutan|Bangladesh|Myanmar. They also list it as Urva auropunctata, as does The Illustrated Checklist of Mammals of the World according to their database. Urva has nine species. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Above list of countries is in line with historical locality records compiled by Veron et al. (2006) available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/230280673 : see Fig 2 on page 5. And in this one also : 0 historical record in Saudi Arabia + Oman. Puzzling is, at least for me, that Veron + Jennings were co-authors in Gilchrist et al. (2009). So were any records in the 2 countries published between 2006 + 2009 that not even Mallon & Budd (2011) were aware of? -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:30, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a confusion of some sort with another Herpestidae species by the assessors. I'm wondering how I'll have to change the mammals pages now. Ddum5347 (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]