23:2823:28, 28 March 2022diffhist−85
Panthera fossilis
Not a single you say? Go under Taxonomic history and there are several. They aren't considered a species of Panthera leo. Also the article title should be changed as per the discussion in talk page.Tags: UndoReverted
08:2708:27, 9 August 2021diffhist+454
Bengal tiger
→Body weight and size: But why disallow this weight to be added but have other random weights and measurements added which are already in the "size range"? This IS a weight record (it maxed the scale out), and it's important as it's the largest cats ever recorded by actual biologists (scientifically).
8 August 2021
09:2709:27, 8 August 2021diffhist+1,318
Bengal tiger
Rather than remove animals sourced from actual naturalists and officers written in books, explain what is questionable in the talk page. If it's poorly written then fix that. This is vandalism.Tag: Undo
23:2823:28, 28 March 2022diffhist−85
Panthera fossilis
Not a single you say? Go under Taxonomic history and there are several. They aren't considered a species of Panthera leo. Also the article title should be changed as per the discussion in talk page.Tags: UndoReverted
08:2708:27, 9 August 2021diffhist+454
Bengal tiger
→Body weight and size: But why disallow this weight to be added but have other random weights and measurements added which are already in the "size range"? This IS a weight record (it maxed the scale out), and it's important as it's the largest cats ever recorded by actual biologists (scientifically).
8 August 2021
09:2709:27, 8 August 2021diffhist+1,318
Bengal tiger
Rather than remove animals sourced from actual naturalists and officers written in books, explain what is questionable in the talk page. If it's poorly written then fix that. This is vandalism.Tag: Undo