Template:Vital article

	Lion is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 24, 2008.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 30, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed August 12, 2007 Peer review Reviewed September 24, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted April 14, 2011 Featured article review Kept Current status: Featured article

This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Cats FA‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.CatsWikipedia:WikiProject CatsTemplate:WikiProject CatsCats articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Mammals FA‑class High‑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 FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. India FA‑class 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 FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

I try to find the sources where lions are called king or lord. The earliest sources I found so far is The Fables of Æsop.

• KING: 1921, translation by T. James and G.F. Townsend. The Kingdom of the Lion: "The beasts of the field and forest had a Lion as their king."(wikisource:An argosy of fables/Æsop)
• LORD OF THE BEASTS: 1922, translation by Joseph Jacobs. The Lion, the Fox, and the Beasts: "a Calf came up to receive the last wishes of the Lord of the Beasts."(wikisource:The_Fables_of_Æsop_(Jacobs)/The_Lion,_the_Fox,_and_the_Beasts)

--mingwangx (talk) 15:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

LittleJerry Just as the fact that a number of WP:RS's state that the Siberian tiger is the biggest tiger or cat doesn't mean that we should say it just like that, because it contradicts what reliable sources about wild lions and tigers say, that for instance the Bengal tiger has heavier average weights in the wild than the Amur tiger, we must exercise caution when dealing with sources giving different statements about the weights of lions, otherwise, what you did would be akin to changing the statement "the Siberian tiger is often considered to be the biggest tiger or felid" to "the Siberian tiger is the biggest tiger or felid", which is WP:Bias, and the talk-page for the tiger has had a similar discussion already. Leo1pard (talk) 05:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC); edited 05:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 1980 study had a sample size of 344, while your study had a sample size of 16. The 1980 study wins out. End of story. LittleJerry (talk) 12:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to add, is there any information to be found, about the number of male lions <> female lions in nature? I've seen a National Geographic documentary about the lion (Lion Ranger - Trouble in the Pride - s01e01) where they say there are significantly more male than female lions. It would be interesting if this ratio is provided for the species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.118.94.49 (talk) 20:28, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello LittleJerry,

I won't dispute that cluttering a featured article with too many pictures is not a good thing (= your revert of my proposal).

However, I can't help regretting that, in a chapter dealing with Hunting and diet, we don't have a series of pictures describing a typical hunting sequence, complete with the initial stalking and the final dragging of the prey to store it away from vultures and hyenas.

Now, we do have such a series of pictures, as shown in the French article. I am aware that it might mean moving away some of the existing photographs; but then, some of them (such as the one showing the lion's teeth) could quite well illustrate a different chapter, as they are not specific to hunting.

Well, I won't fight over that, anyway: it's up to you. Just a regret... Azurfrog (talk) 11:54, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But do you think it adds anything really specific that is not understandable by text? This article has alot of images already. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:11, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do think the more the pictures exemplify and illustrate the text, the better it is. Which is the case here: first crawling to get "close to their prey before starting the attack" (1st pic), then "They usually pull it down by the rump" (2d pic), and "kill by a strangling bite to the throat" (3d one), and "sometimes drag large prey into cover" (4th one). The idea that pictures should somehow show preferably something that's not in the text is rather new to be: I just thought what it added here was precisely to have a very typical complete hunting sequence.
Of course, this is just my opinion, and I do agree that we already have pictures galore. There again, I certainly won't fight over it, so end of story, as far as I am concerned. Azurfrog (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since the article is over 144,000 bytes, I think new edits should be monitored and any new information added should be discussed here first. LittleJerry (talk) 00:24, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:40, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I do too and think that LittleJerry does a great job to watch over and revise additions. -- BhagyaMani (talk) 09:46, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that new edits need to be monitored, but we can't require that editors discuss changes first. That goes against the ethos of Wikipedia. We can be stricter on sourcing and edit summaries, but it would be hard to justify removal of a new section that was properly sourced and explained just because it wasn't discussed first.   Jts1882 | talk  10:00, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lions are vegan. They don't eat anything that comes from an animal. They don't even wear leather boots so I don't know how they would ever survive in Minecraft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C1:A05:DE00:508:7804:45B2:CA8E (talk) 13:11, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]