Talk:Wombat

Jargon File

Found another signification in the jargon file:

http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/W/WOMBAT.html

May be worth adding in the future...

highly unlikely that i would ever be able to produce a cite, but in the late 1960's at least, the housekeeping staff in the (then exclusively male) undergraduate dormitories at the johns hopkins university were referred to as wombats.origin? who the hell knows. Toyokuni3 (talk) 03:30, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Revert

I reverted because:

• We cannot write "the wombat" because we are talking about three different species.
• The changed link points to an article with a good deal less information relevant to the topic (extinction of Australian megafauna) than the previous link.
• "Probably" is more accurate than the weasel-worded "may have". We are not talking about a faint possibility here.
• "Dingo" is always capitalised. However, the vast majority of wombats today will never see a Dingo as they occupy areas inside the Dog Fence where Dingos are scarce. Dogs, on the other hand, are distressingly common.

Tannin 22:09, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Capital Letter In Dingo

Why is Dingo always capitalized? ~SJW

The assertion that dingo is always capitalised is mistaken. Fawcett5 03:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've never heard of that before either. Dora Nichov 01:52, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

It is a standard for the common name of species. see WP:BIRD for the meat of why. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Broken links

I've removed this link [1] as broken. -- Danny Yee 09:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

party girl?

An anonymous contributor added: "Also used as a pseudonym for an online party-girl."

Pseudonym is not the right word here, but can someone confirm that something like "The term "wombat" is also used to refer to online party-girls." would be correct? Danny Yee 23:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

There is indeed an Australian semi-obscene sexual connotation to the word "wombat", and I am happy to include it IF it is deemed appropriate, and that is a BIG "if". However, it refers exclusively to men. Old_Wombat (talk) 09:26, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Muddle Headed Wombat

I added this comment because I noticed that the Muddle Headed Wombat page hasn't been written yet, though it was already referenced from the Australian Broadcasting Company page. I've never written a from-scratch Wiki page yet, so am slightly hesitant. Would any vombatiphile want to do it instead of me? If so, say here and I'll help with any info that I have, otherwise I'll try to do it myself. Kay Dekker 03:39, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I've started a basic article at The Muddle-Headed Wombat, feel free to expand it, I have never read any of the books so I don't know what to write about it.--nixie 10:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll start fleshing it out with details as I can. Kay Dekker 11:51, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Australian RSPCA advert

"the wombat's somewhat idyllic nature"

Idyllic? Chambers defines idyll(ic) as "1 a short poem or prose work describing a simple, pleasant, usually rural or pastoral scene. 2 a story, episode or scene suitable for such a work, eg one of happy innocence or love. 3 a work of this character in another art form, especially music. idyllic adj 1 relating to or typical of an idyll. 2 charming; picturesque."

I think that can't be what's meant. Perhaps "retiring"? Kay Dekker 10:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Retiring would probably be a better adjective.--nixie 10:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Triggs books

I've added bibliographic data for her book "Wombats", and I wonder if it's actually a first edition of the other-mentioned Triggs book? Kay Dekker 12:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

• grin* Answered my own question! No, it isn't. "Wombats" is a kids' book; the other is for adult readers.

Aboriginal Tribes

I'm going to change 'Aboriginal tribes' to Aboriginal communities because that is generally considered to be the correct terminology

How big are they...

it would be good to get some stats on the size/weight of these creatures... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.88.179.132 (talk • contribs) .

The information you seek is already in the article. Read the whole article... - UtherSRG (talk) 11:58, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

A wombat is a marsupil.The tiny newborn grows in it's mother's pouch.The female's pouch faces backwards so that,when she digs a burrow,dirt does not get inside it.

This is another one of those statements that anthropomorphizes the evolutionary process -- implying that the reason it has developed this way is so that it will produce such-and-such a result. It would be better to say that, because the female's pouch faces backwards, dirt doesn't get thrown inside it when she's digging. rowley (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Popular Culture Entries

Maybe showing my age, but when I used to play MUDs, wombats were usually the most common thing found in the newbie area, allowing a character armed only with a pointy stick to gain (albeit slowly) experience points. Just wondering if this should be mentioned under the references in culture section. Sabalon 12:21, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Not sure about this, but on House M.D., hasn't Hṛouse called Dr Chase a wombat a few times?

This is not even remotely notable. -- Danny Yee 04:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, NY had the wombat as the mascot for its athletics program from 1971-1982. EatGrammar (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Surely there should be a reference to the 'Muddle headed wombat' series of books by Ruth Park. After all, these have their own wikipedia page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/The_Muddle-Headed_Wombat - cheers, Bob Kentridge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.155.202 (talk) 14:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Wombats as pets?

Being European, wombats are a pretty exotic species to me. So I made a Google Image search to see how they look like and found quite a lot of pictures showing people holding wombats in the arms. Does this mean that (a) quite some Australians keep them as pets, or rather (b) they like to pick up wild wombats that just happen to live in their garden and pose for a photo with them? Simon A. 18:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Firstly it is illegal to keep them as pets, you need a licence to keep these animals, and then mainly for rehabilitation purposes. Second like many wild animals these animals can run fast, and if you corner them the, those sharp front claws used for digging will be used to attack you, so in the wild I wouldnt touch them. Most likely they are photos of the animals in Zoos where they can be quiet tame. They like Kangaroos, Koalas etc can get use to humans handling. Enlil Ninlil 03:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Wild ones can be fierce and extremely strong... Dora Nichov 14:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Wild wombats are very well known for killing pet dogs that have followed them into their burrows. They are quite dangerous animals, and you should never attempt to pat one in the wild. The adult is naturally agressive & will likely run at you knocking you off your feet and may also bite you. I have not had any friendly experiences with adult wild wombats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.155.250 (talk) 18:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Cubic Scats??

For real? Their anus actually produces BLOCKS of feces? I MUST see a picture of this.

http://www.pbase.com/gehyra/image/38902120 121.44.202.33 21:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Crushing against tunnel roof

I suspect that this entry stems from a Douglas adams story written as a joke about Australia. Recently this story has risen in internet-viewership through StumbleUpon. I recommend that this be deleted unless someone can find a reference verifying it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.246.52 (talk) 08:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Suspect not, reference supplied. --Michael Johnson (talk) 10:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the reference doesn't mention the facts as such. i've removed the probable bogus info, and the reference. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I quote The wombat is also capable of crushing attackers against the burrow roof. [2] in the "Lifestyle" paragraph. I also came across other, less reliable sources in a google search. It is certainly a fact I use when talking about wombats, I have no reason to believe it not to be true. (if it is untrue, I really need to know) --Michael Johnson (talk) 03:57, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Checked Triggs last night and it is there too. --Michael Johnson (talk) 23:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Heads-up

Mentioned in Wired, landed on the front page of Google's "Wired Top Stories" widget. [3] Ronabop (talk) 03:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

That's 7 years old. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:01, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Diet?

Are wombats ever eaten by people or hunted? Are they legal as pets outside of Australia?

I too wonder what they taste like. 59.167.46.201 (talk) 12:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Really? With their teeth?

Wombats dig extensive burrow systems with rodent-like front teeth and powerful claws.

Do they really dig with their teeth? rowley (talk) 20:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Later... Okay, the only references I've found to wombats -- or anything -- digging with their teeth are those that look like they're merely copying from this Wikipedia article (or maybe copying from the same source as this Wikipedia article copied from?), the closest verifiable reference being that they use their teeth to bite through roots when digging (with their feet). Unless somebody has a video of a wombat (or any other marsupial or rodent) digging with its teeth, I will conclude that this is misinformation being spread from sloppy writing. In the meantime, I'm going to take the bit in my teeth (to employ an apt metaphor) and supply a wording that is more likely to be truthful. Somebody prove me wrong. rowley (talk) 21:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Citation needed, not so much

There's such a thing as being too cautious when requesting citations. An example is the request for citation after a list of reasons why these animals don't make good pets. They're foragers...which means they need to cover a wide territory, they're nocturnal, and they have hard-wired digging instincts. What makes it hard to understand that these are not good characteristics for domestication? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.176.25 (talk) 02:58, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Add to that they're quite territorial, aggressive, and solitary beasts... 220.233.46.242 (talk) 09:00, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Wombats taking shortcuts?

"They generally move slowly, and because of this are known for taking shortcuts, but when threatened they can reach up to 40 km/h (25 mph) and maintain that speed for up to 90 seconds" Eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.80.65.102 (talk) 22:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I was about to comment on exactly that when I saw that someone beat me to it. I think what is meant by this is that if you put a fence in, and even wire it with electricity, if a wombat has decided to take a short cut through this spot it will. They're tremendous problem solvers in this regard. They'll push through logs, tunnel through rock barriers, climb earthworks, or even brave an electric fence if they've decided they're going through. This damage to farmers' fences can prove problematic as you can imagine which is wombies can end up at the wrong end of a Lee-Enfield. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.184.106 (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I know I'm late to the discussion here, but I'm going to remove the sentence. If we have some citations for what you're describing above (and, I have no reason to doubt what you're saying is true), we should include it. However, what you're describing doesn't constitute a "short cut". They're taking the most direct path that they are able to take based upon their intelligence, skills, etc. If a bird flies over a fence, we don't say it's taking a "short cut". Rather, it just has the means to not have to go around the fence. Seems to me that the same goes for an animal that crawl under, through, etc.JoelWhy (talk) 13:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The reference mentions they can maintain that speed for 150m, which should be about 13.5 seconds at 40 km/h. There is no mention of 90 seconds.217.28.82.254 (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism

I apologize in advance if I misunderstand Wikipedia's standards, but a significant part of the article is copied directly from the source.

"Human impact on the wombat population is now at a critical level. Wombats suffer from a disease called mange that was introduced to Australia and to wombats by human activity. Mites that cause mange lead to deep skin fissures that become flyblown and septic. This leads to a long, slow and painful death for wombats. In addition they are also being affected by a fungal lung disease for which there is currently no cure. Diseases and viruses brought in by farming activity now affect wombats. Incidents of coccidia, clostridium perfringens and tetanus amongst others ,are evident in wombats. Some people believe that the distribution of mange is so widespread that only isolated populations and those tended in sanctuaries will, in the long term survive. It is only recently that Veterinarians have begun to receive training in dealing with native animal health. Behavioural studies on wombats are few and limited in their scope. As a result wombats are misunderstood and those attempting to rear and rehabilitate injured and orphaned wombats have difficulty getting them appropriate medical attention and in helping others understand the best ways of living with wombats." http://www.wombatprotection.org.au/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.175.32.223 (talk) 22:06, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for having no time to look into details. A general note is that a text can be copied to or from wikipedia, i.e. it is important to look into any possible timestamps. Materialscientist (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Yea, but since the source w/ the identical information is cited, I'm betting it is a copyright violation. In any case, a wombat protection society is not generally a good source for this type of information. I'll see if I can find something better to source and take out the copyrighted material.JoelWhy (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

All I wanted to say is that wikipedia texts are often verbatim copied even by respectable websites. This can be seen by timestamps, character of wikiedits (single edit or multiple rewrites of that section), and sometimes by the style of writing/formatting. Materialscientist (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

(e/c)Yep, it's a copy and paste job taken from the website. The site's content existed in February 2011 and looking back in the article, without having to go back to February, the content was added in March 2011 by Wombatwarrior (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) which was hidden but readded back into the article by 12quality (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Bidgee (talk) 22:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, a one-day account (Wombatwarrior) .. Materialscientist (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on an addition to replace the text I took out. Will try to post something tomorrow (unless someone beats me to it.)JoelWhy (talk) 22:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Mystery disease killing off wombats

from iol scitech May 15 2012

"A mystery liver disease thought to be caused by introduced weeds is causing hairy-nosed wombats in southern Australia to go bald and die, researchers said on Tuesday. The illness, which causes the wombat to lose some or all of its fur and then starve to death, is tearing through South Australia's native southern hairy-nosed wombats, threatening entire populations.

Initially the animals were thought to have mange, but it became so widespread and severe - with shiny, healthy skin revealed beneath - that autopsies were carried out to determine what was causing the illness. University of Adelaide researcher Wayne Boardman said the non-native toxic potato weed appeared to be affecting the wombats' livers, triggering a reaction with ultraviolet light that caused them to lose their fur. Boardman said it was unclear why the herbivorous wombat had suddenly taken to eating the noxious weed but a shortage of their usual grasses and alternative foods due to prolonged local drought could be to blame." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.107.240.36 (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Burrow Flap method for treating mange in womats

Hello In Victoria and NSW volunteers are treating wild wombats in their habitat...Using camera's to find the affected wombats burrow, then placing a burrow flap across the entrance with 5-3 ml of cydectin...some wombats in the late stages can be treated with the pole and scoop method, this only works until the wombat feels better, then the burrow flap comes into use... The Mange Management Group has a website that anyone can visit and use our experience... This is a very good method for the wombat and the volunteer caring for it, after the initial finding of the burrow the volunteer only has to return weekly for 8 weeks then fortnightly for four treatments.... Please is you are concerned get onto this website and see the results, if the wombats in Tasmania are that easy to approach, the pole treatment would be applicable.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.249.190 (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Name for a group of wombats

The article says that a group of wombats is a wisdom and cites a fact in an unsourced natgeo page. This strikes me as an odd factoid that could be easily be posted around the internet with circular sourcing. I searched scholar.google.com and found nothing mentioning a group of wombats being a wisdom, but a variety of sources calling a group of them a mob or colony. I'm not sure what to about this, if anything, since a "wisdom of wombats" has been cited enough that it's nearly become true if it wasn't already. Does anyone have any more input?Bobrm2k3 (talk) 16:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

I couldn't find any dictionary entry for this as well. The natgeo link is now broken and there is now a second link added to a book called "A Compendium of Collective Nouns". I'm unsure where that book got its source from or if it is just something the author Woop Studios came up with.

This should probably be deleted, along with both sources. Ikalvarado (talk) 06:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Considered vermin in 1906 - but until when???

The article says they were declared to be vermin in 1906, but makes no mention of WHEN this ceased - are they still vermin? Surely not. http://www.ozarkwild.org/manuals/WombatNotes.pdf suggests "1960's" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.1.57.224 (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Typo

I believe the last phrase, instead of rabbit roof fences should be rabbit-proof fences

This is from footnote 32, http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/?base=4898.

I don't really know what I'm doing, so I'm not sure how to change it myself. I don't even know if I'm doing THIS right. Virago2 (talk) 08:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Posting to the talkpage definitely not wrong! CMD (talk) 08:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Notable wombats

Patrick the wombat (https://wildlifepark.com.au/wildlife/patrick-the-wombat/) got quite a lot of media attention the last few years, for being the worlds oldest living and heaviest wombat. However, he has since passed away. Should a list of Patrick and other "famous" wombats be added somewhere at the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oherik (talk • contribs) 11:42, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Mukupirna

Can a confirmed user add something like the following to the Evolution and taxonomy section - In 2020 fossils of Mukupirna, meaning big bones was found. This is thought to be the ancestor of all living wombats and the koala. 2A00:23C6:3B82:8500:2168:3CD4:D868:3F67 (talk) 17:52, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

References

Oct 22nd

I don't know how official this is but Oct 22 is apparently Wombat awareness day. Perhaps this can be mentioned in the conservation section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.93.239.143 (talk) 18:44, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2021

The term common wombat needs to be removed. That term is inaccurate, due to mange ravishing our wombats and recent bushfires. These animals are no longer common. The correct name for the 'common wombat' is bare-nosed wombat. 220.244.100.171 (talk) 14:27, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Common wombat is one of three names for the Vombatus Ursinus species; per WP:COMMONNAME, we used the name that's most frequently used/recognizable. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:45, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Nobel Prize in Physics

What a foolish reference. The "Ig Nobel Prize" is NOT the Nobel Prize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.109.251.113 (talk) 13:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Missing conservation status

as per title — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.88.225.225 (talk) 22:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Conservation status applies to a single species. This article covers three species so the status is not relevant.-gadfium 22:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Contradictory Information

In the conservation section it says:

Conservation All species of wombats are protected in every Australian state.[45] The northern hairy-nosed wombat is an endangered species.[46] The biggest threats the species faces are its small population size, predation by wild dogs, competition for food because of overgrazing by cattle and sheep, and disease.[46][47] The only known wild populations of this species exist in two locations in Queensland, the Epping Forest National Park, and a smaller colony being established by translocating wombats to the Richard Underwood Nature Refuge at Yarran Downs.[46] This second colony is being created through the Xstrata reintroduction project, which is being funded by Xstrata, a Swiss global mining company.[48] The wombat population in the Epping Forest National Park has been increasing since a predator-proof fence was erected in the park.[46] According to the latest census, taken in 2013, the park is home to 196 of these endangered wombats, with numbers at the two locations expected to have increased to 230 by late 2015.[46] Despite its name, the common wombat is no longer common, and it has been officially a protected animal in New South Wales since 1970.[49] However, in eastern Victoria, they are not protected, and they are considered by some to be pests, especially due to the damage they cause to rabbit-proof fences.[46][50]

I believe the they _are_ protected and the later text should be changed. [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.182.228 (talk • contribs) 07:08, 28 July 2023 (UTC)