Talk:Whaling in the Faroe Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whaling in the Faroe Islands is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
May 22, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Faroe Islands, a WikiProject related to the nation of Faroe Islands. 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.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Contents

[edit] POV?

I suspect this article originated as pro-whaling POV. Even after removing some of it, I suspect the proper place for this article is as part of the Faroe Islands page. Either way, the following claims need either sources or removal:

  • Whaling in the Faroe Islands has been practiced since at least the 10th century.
  • Around one thousand Long-finned Pilot Whales are harvested in the annual whale drive by Faroese fishermen each year.
  • The drive has been practiced since at least the tenth century and records exist in part since 1584, and continuously from 1709 -
  • the longest period of time for statistics existing for any wild animal harvest in the world.

Touchstone 03:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the first bullet is quite interesting since I wrote the article originally (although it is has changed a lot since then), and normally I accused of having an anti-whaling POV. Can't win :). Anyway these statistics are not to hard to tie to specific publications that I have at home, so please don't remove them yet. I should be able to add inline citations today. Please bear in mind that most wikipedia articles were written when inline citations were not even thought of so bear with me. Pcb21 Pete 09:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Ok I've sourced all the comments you enquired about.
It would be a very bad idea to merge into the Faroe Islands.
Looking at again, I think the article is bending over backwards to be NPOV. I wonder what your own POV is on this issue? Pcb21 Pete 13:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
This article seems fairly NPOV and I agree that it would be a bad idea if it was merged into the Faroe Islands article. --Mecil 03:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grindadráp

I don't think the word Grindadráp should be used as much as it is, in many cases hunt or drive are bether words. And i don't agree with the comment of Nua2: there is no word in english that can fully describe grindadráp. ℚuackor 01:28, 2 July 2006 (UTC)


Great many things get lost in a translation. I don´t think there is a word in english that can fully describe grindadráp. But the english speaking public may feel it is easier to relate to the word "hunt" or "drive".Nua2

Does "grindadráp" not literally mean "whale slaughter"? I would have thought that Faroese "dráp" was etymologically related to the Icelandic "dráp" or the Swedish "dråp". I think that "whale slaughter" is a perfectly acceptable literal translation - we cannot decide what the translation of a certain word is just to make it sound less like, well, slaughter. I'm not against subsistence whaling, but I think that a non-literal translation may not serve the Faroese whale-hunting tradition well in the long run. Additionally, I do not think that the word should be used in English translation in this article. It deals specifically with the Faroese tradition of grindadráp and not with whale hunting in general. I think that the word grindadráp is acceptable, if not preferable, in this context. Pikiwedian 12:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Swedish dråp translates to 'manslaughter' in Swedish, at least in law. It may also refer to when an animal kills another animal. When a human kills another humanintenionally, it's called mord in Swedish, i.e. 'murder'. I guess Faroese dráp generally means 'killing'. The word "slaughter" sounds too strong.
Jens Persson (213.67.64.22 22:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC))
"Dráp" in Icelandic translates to English as "slaughter". I'm not sure what the exact translation from Faroese is, but I'm willing to bet that it's closer to "slaughter" than "mansluaghter". I only included the Swedish "dråp" to show an etymological connection between the words and the concepts they represent. I still think that "whale slaughter" is the mose faithful translation of "grindadráp". "Murder" and "slaughter" are not synonomous in English, for instance, cows are routinely "slaughtered" in abbatoirs, not "murdered" (although that does, of course, depend on who you're talking to....) Pikiwedian 22:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

"Slaughter" and "kill" are roughly synonymous in English and to keep one without mention of the other is not faithful translation. I don't see what "pilotwhaling" has anything to do with this definition except to make it sound less harsh.

"Slaughter" and "kill" are not totally synonomous in English - in any case, the similarity of the words in English is rather irrelevant. Rather it is conveying the meaning of the Faroese word "dráp" that is important. "Slaughter" in English may take on different shades of meaning depending on context and intent. I have a feeling that the person (hiding behind IP address 200.28.132.30) who recently added "slaughter" here: "Dráp means to kill or slaughter. Literally translated therefore grindadráp means pilot whale kill, or perhaps: pilot whale slaughter" did so in an POV sense. But I agree with the translation, and therefore think that it should remain. Pikiwedian 08:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

What does "grind" mean, then? The isthmus towards the north of the Shetland mainland is called "Mavis Grind", which doesn't make it seem as if it means "whales". Deipnosophista 13:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shank?

Whaling in the Faroe Islands#Pro links to the disambiguation page Shank. That should be corrected, but as I do not understand that reference, I can't figure out how to disambiguate it. Abu ari 12:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What whale?

In the last photo in this article (which I also use in the more generic dolphin drive hunting article), I suspect the whales to be Northern Bottlenose whales, even if it says that they're pilot whales. Now, I could be wrong, but they don't look like pilot whales to me because of the shape of their head. Perhaps it's due to the angle of the photo, but they don't look like them to me. Photo of a long-finned pilot whale: http://www.ericwpreston.com/images/PilotWhale_1.jpg Photo of a Northern bottlenose whale: http://www.beakedwhales.plus.com/images/nbottlenosebw/98skbottlenose3.jpg This would also make the notion that only pilot whales are hunted incorrect. BabyNuke 13:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I've had it confirmed elsewhere that these are indeed Northern bottlenose whales. BabyNuke 21:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


The pictures are of pilot whales, not of Northern Bottlenose whales. Shank is incorrect I suspect in this case it means meat of poor quality. The hunt is contreversial, and many internet articles are full og mistakes. It is important to not use these as sources.--Nua2 12:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I am convinced that these are NOT pilot whales. I am not looking at internet articles, this is quite simply me saying that these are not pilot whales. Pilot whales do not have such a pronounced rostrum and have a very blunt forehead, plus tend to have a darker skin. Northern bottlenose whales DO have a more pronounced rostrum however and a more pale skin. Plus, Northern bottlenose dolphins happen to be common around the Faroe islands. So unless you can provide evidence that these are pilot whales, don't claim that they are. BabyNuke 16:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, my mistake! After looking more closely at the photographs I can tell that those aren´t pilot whales--Nua2 16:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Journalism comment

To quote wikipedia's official policy: "Neutral Point of View (NPOV) is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, that is, they must represent views fairly and without bias."

Right now, the article states that many journalists reporting on the issue are ignorant. I feel that only if you could provide examples of common false statements made in the media, this would be an acceptable statement. BabyNuke 19:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, you're obviously very reluctant to see that comment go, which I feel makes this article deserve a POV stamp. I'm not gonna fight some edit war over it. BabyNuke 09:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There have been numerous tabloid reports over the decades; quite recently there was one in the daily maile... Actually some Faroese students received death threats after the article was printed..., however the comment derives from the german article, where the exact qoute is Internationale Tierschützer kritisieren diese Jagd als grausam und unnötig, wobei viele journalistische Berichte keine Detailkenntnis der Fangmethoden und wirtschaftlichen Bedeutung aufweisen. Meaning: " International animal rights organizations critisize the hunt for being cruel and unnecessary, whereby many journalistic reports do not exhibit a detail knowledge of the catch methods and economic meaning"--Nua2 13:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The point is that this comment portrays negative journalism as being based on ignorance, hence it hardly being a "neutral" statement. Before making such a claim, get some evidence, like articles obviously showing ignorance in reporting. BabyNuke 14:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I am very well aware of the point that you are making.

In the 1980´s most journalistic reports where based on ignorance... It is problematic finding these older articles nowadays, but still their are articles being printed that represent Faroese people as barbarians, which simply isn´t the case. I am sure I will find an article to prove my point. --Nua2 11:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The current news article linked to deals with dolphin drive hunts in Japan. I don't see why it is an example of ignorant reporting on whaling on the Faroes. BabyNuke 12:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Faroese language

Do we really need this many words in Faroese in the English wikipedia? I understand the use of some, such as Grindadráp, but it should just be mentioned at the beginning and then not needed again. As for almost every other word, it really isn't necessary and it just makes it seem as if the article is designed for people to understand the Faroese language and not to deal with Whaling in the Faroe Islands. There is a lot of text here but i think that it needs to be worked on to get it better. Chris_huhtalk 10:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "pilot whale" vs "Pilot Whale"

Someone has capitalised almost every instance of "pilot whale". This surely can't be correct? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pikiwedian (talk • contribs) 10:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

As per wikiproject Cetaceans, species names are to be capitalized. BabyNuke 11:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
OK - I'm not a zoologist, so I was a bit unsure of the convention. You learn something new every day! Pikiwedian 11:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Usually species names arent capitalised anyway in zoology, just in wikiproject cetaceans Chris_huhtalk 12:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, "Pilot Whale" has been changed back to "pilot whale". Any chance that there is a consensus view of which is correct?Pikiwedian 10:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion

There has been some "NPOV" additions to this page from an unregistered user (an IP address only) - how does everyone feel about reverting the article to rectify this?Pikiwedian 09:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like someone went ahead and reverted it anyway! Pikiwedian 09:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mercury took over the brains of Faroers

Just added a new whaling photo website link to the article. Have a bucket handy when you watch it! Photo no.8 on it should be shown to saucer aliens and they will eradicate mankind no questions asked. 82.131.210.162 16:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Schools and Skinn

I propose that Schools and Skinn is removed from the table of whale catch, as this is of very little interest to common people. This would give the following table.

Period Whales
1709-1950 178,259
1951-1960 18,772
1961-1970 15,784
1971-1980 11,311
1981-1990 18,806
1991-2000 9,212
2001 918
2002 626
2003 503
2004 1,010

If there is no objection to this, ill replace it, next time i am at this page. ℚuackor 16:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

=I would like that to be kept in - we cannot decide what is and what is not of interest to "common people". The aim is to be encyclopaedic, and for this reason, I would like it to be kept. Pikiwedian 11:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why does wikipedia support whaling

by featuring an article about this crime? This is purely disgusting, pointless, and removes Faroers from the species homo sapiens. These folks should all be butchered like the whales, and Denmark should be thrown out of the EU for that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.163.235.183 (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

I don't think this deserves a proper comment. ℚuackor 08:47, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no comment needed from such retards who believe that traditions justify massacring animals. The quality of a human can be seen in his treatment of other creatures, and these folks clearly fall short of the designation human.