Talk:White-tailed deer

Untitled

It was suggested that this article should be renamed White-tailed deer. The vote is shown below:

• Oppose. Check the article capitalization in Category:Deer. dbenbenn | talk 20:55, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Why should they not all be changed? white-tailed deer is certainly the way it should be written in a sentence. DoubleBlue (Talk) 21:25, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Caps is the policy defined by Wikipedia:Wikiproject Tree of Life. No caps would be just as good a policy. Pcb21| Pete 08:55, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
      • From what I can gather from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life, the capitalisation stems from a belief that it is a proper noun naming the species. I think the use of this article betrays the fact that it is not normally used that way. Even this article doesn't use caps for white-tailed deer in sentences. DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
        • It used to be capitalised like the other articles, but because it isn't the most respected policy in the world, someone down-cased and no-one could be bothered to revert yet (see this edit). Characterizing it as a proper noun issue is incorrect. The issue is that some authorities capitalise and others don't, so it is hard to apply the usual "Wikipedia doesn't decide, it just copies what the relevant authorities do" rule. Pcb21| Pete 15:42, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it be moved. violet/riga (t) 10:59, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Buck Picture

It is a mule deer, not a whitetail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.59.211 (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I dunno, you could be right, but the USDA Research Service has it captioned "In the Northeast, the white-tailed deer is the primary host for adult blacklegged ticks." -- Mwanner | Talk 22:07, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

All pics currently show or white-tailed deer. | Omegaman66 18:33, 22 January 2007 (UTC) 18:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)|Talk]]

I thought this would be right, but it's also wrong. These are all pictures of Mule Deer. Here is a picture of a trophy white-tailed deer. Notice the antlers are one main beam with all tines off of it. You should also notice the fluffy white fur around the tail area. These are the main indicators of a white-tailed deer. Please see the Colorado Parks & Wildlife Big Game Brochure, Page 13 for proper identification indicators. Pflucier (talk) 15:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC) pflucier

References

Geographical Distribution

I've changed a little bit the body text, including South America in that part concerning the species geographic distribution. You can check this information in the following link: www.natureserve.com/infonatura (entry: odocoileus virginianus). Exlibris 22:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

subspecies classification

I am not sure if we should have the subspecies listed (trinomial name first, common name last) or (common name first, trinomial name last). Phaldo 17:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

the overpopulation issue...

Surprised not to see it here. Is this on another article? SB Johnny 13:41, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

This is a good idea, since the DNR always tries to regulate the population. Also include maybe the affects of predators (wolves) on the White-Tailed Deer. Population control is important to regulate herd, offspring production, and disease control. Michalakhunter (talk) 16:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC) Hunter Michalak

Classification Section

Why are the O. hemionus subspecies listed in the Classification section? Those are mulies not white-tails. Toiyabe 18:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Deer Hunting

How about something on hunting deer? Field Dressing them? I mean, millions of people hunt deer, seems appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.238.254.234 (talk) 12:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not do how-to info. There is an article on hunting. -- Mwanner | Talk 12:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Lots of subspecies

From whence do all these subspecies come? ITIS says that only three are valid. Natureserve also lists 3. We have about 38 or 39 of them listed in this article. The only place I can find anywhere near that many subspecies listed is on that guy from France's deer-lover page and a handful of other pages which, apparently, use him as an authority. I suggest that ITIS is a pretty good authority. If they list only three valid subspecies, I think the article should reflect that. Comments? — Dave 22:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

After one week, there have been no comments in response to my query. I will allow another week or so and then, if there are no substantive objections, I will edit the article to conform to accepted taxonomical realities. — Dave 13:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the number of subspecies listed is awfully high. Maybe somebody made a list of all the subspecies ever proposed? Mule Deer also needs to be trimmed down. Toiyabe 15:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

If memory serves me right, in the days before genetic comparisons among populations, most mammals with large ranges used to have long subspecies lists; at one time, the list on this page was probably the (more or less) accepted one. When someone trims the list down, it'd be helpful to include an explanation of the old and new methods of what constitutes a proper subspecies. – Swid ^{(talk | edits)} 19:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Scientists only consider of three of the 20, true subspecies in North America. the Virginia Whitetail the most common. The Colombian Whitetail found in the pacific Northwest and the key deer found only in the Florida keys. The Great White Hunter 20:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC) Mike_Winters

Major rewrite

I've made the changes we discussed regarding simplifying the taxonomy for the species. While in there, I also took the time to complete a major rewrite of the article. Have a look and fix up anything you think I missed or muffed. — Dave 15:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Size variation

I've seen weights from 18 kg (40 lb) to 232 kg (511 lb) in various zoological literature – is this the mammal species with greatest variance in size? Other candidates for this record are the Least Weasel at 24 g (0.85 oz) to 250 g (8.8 oz, data combined from various sources), and possibly the Virginia Opossum – which could be the winner by quite a margin if The Animal Diversity Web has got its figures right. --Anshelm '77 20:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The upper end sounds reasonable, although it would be way way out on the tail end of the distribution. How do you determine the lower end weight? At birth? At sexual maturity? If it's at birth, the mammal with the greatest weight range (as a ratio) will probably be a marsupial - my guess would be a Red Kangaroo. If your definition is at sexual maturity, the winner may be a weasel or other mustelid - my understanding is that some members of that family are sexually mature before birth. Toiyabe 22:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I think the range should be for "adults", which may be at times somewhat hard to define. Species that grow throughout their lives (elephants and kangaroos come to mind), for example, may be a problem. Time of sexual maturity doesn't help much, as it is reached before true adulthood – we should know as humans. I suppose we have to rely on reported weights for adults in scientific literature. I did find another candidate that has the White-tailed Deer beat: the Brown Bear Ursus arctos varies at least from 45 kg (99 lb) to 757 kg (1,670 lb) throughout its range, the largest almost 17 times the size of the smallest. The champion should be found among species with notable geographic variation or sexual dimorphism, such as some Fur Seals. --Anshelm '77 16:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Response to Major rewrite

I think the person who drastically reduced the number of subspecies of white-tailed deer to 3 subspecies only took into account those deer of North America. I do agree that with the near depletion of white-tailed deer in the early 1900's that deer from several localities east of the Rocky Mountains were transplanted to several regions for restocking purposes so "yes", the deer east of the Rocky Mountains may be largely mixed. However, I do believe that the Northwest White-tailed Deer, Columbian White-tailed Deer, Arizona Coeue's Deer, Key Deer, and Texas White-tailed Deer are distinct subspecies.

This person totally ignored the subspecies of Central and South America. The white-tailed deer of South America are genetically distinct from those of North America. I think this article is need of an expert. So far, I have not found much conclusive evidence on new classifications of white-tailed deer. (This unsigned comment was added from IP address 64.186.239.30 on 2006-07-10 14:25:20)

Only Mature bucks have Antlers???????

Who ever wrote that doesn't know the Whitetailed deer very well. All male deer can have antlers, immature or mature. If a male is born late in the year, they may not have a fully developed set of antlers. — (This unsigned comment was added from IP address 199.72.168.138 on 2006-07-17 14:02:42)

Well, it's sort of rare for fawns to have antlers, according to any meaningful definition of that word. They will have small nubs, usually no more than an inch long and often less. Yearlings will normally have forks or something like that. Small antlers, sure, but antlers nonetheless. So, I guess the question next becomes: at what age do male deer mature? In most of the deer range, yearling males are sexually mature and are fully capable, anatomically, of impregnating a doe. The fact that they almost never do, due to the dominance hierarchy and lack of attractiveness to females, does not mean they're not sexually mature (In the same way that a 14 year old human male is sexually mature.) There is a difference between being sexually mature and being able to successfully compete for mating opportunities. The way I read that sentence is to say that fawns and females do not have antlers, only adult males do. An adult, biologically, is defined as an animal which is sexually mature. Read, for example, this page: http://www.ksr.ku.edu/libres/Mammals_of_Kansas/odo-virgini.html, this page: http://www.dnr.sc.gov/marine/mrri/acechar/specgal/whtadeer.htm, and, let's say, this page: http://www.fao.org/docrep/T0750E/t0750e0n.htm#3.15.1%20odocoileus%20virginianus%20(white%20tailed%20deer) Do you have evidence to the contrary? — Dave 19:02, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

A buck (male deer) is considered mature at the age of 3-1/2. At this age he will start to show is dominance within his heard. He will also then have the body size and antler mass to show his subordinates who's boss and who gets to breed the next hot doe. (The preceding, unsigned comment was provided by User:149.55.30.100, 16:06, 2 August 2006

Very well. I've provided three competent references (from, for example, the South Carolina Depatrment of Natural Resources and from the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation) to show that white-tails become sexually mature in their second year of life. Please provide references from a competent authority to support you contention. If you are able to do so, I would welcome your edit of the article to conform to your position. — Dave 04:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats also "Very well." ...but that wasn't your original question. The question I was answering was this one: "So, I guess the question next becomes: at what age do male deer mature?" It had nothing to do with the "sexual" maturity of deer, only the maturity. This begs the definition of the word mature. As per Webster's New World Dictionary,mature:1. full grown; ripe 2.fully developed, perfected,etc. So, allthough a 13 year old "boy" is capable of breeding, he is not yet fully grown. A Whitetailed deer is actually able to breed at the age of 1-1/2 years, but not fully grown untill he's 4-5 years old.[1]

And to do with antler maturity... http://www.pabucks.com/deerantlers.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.55.30.100 (talk) 13:07, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You are correct, of course. I apologise since, as a biologist, I was focussed far too much on the technical meaning of the terms in use. You see, when biologists speak of "maturity" we invariably mean "sexual maturity" which is equated with maturation of the gonads. To a biologist, a white-tail is mature (has mature gonads) at 1.5 yr of age. I can see, by your contribution, that there are other, vernacular, meanings for the term "mature" which would be more familiar to the average reader. I respect those facts and that you have stated them correctly. I shall edit the article accordingly. If you have further insights, please proffer them, here. — Dave 03:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, Dave. Saying "[...] only mature males have antlers" means that bucks have antlers while fawns and does do not (except in incredibly rare cases). I'm a deer hunter, and people often say "mature buck" to mean an older (and wiser) buck who's reached full body size, weight and usually has large antlers (if he's healthy). But this is an article about biology, not deer hunting or hunter's slang/vernacular. So the original wording is correct. But it SHOULD be mentioned that deer hunters consider "mature" to be an older buck that's usually 3-4+ years old, at full body size and weight and usually having a large, full set of antlers (aka "rack" or "horns"). Of course, the antlers themselves can't define "maturity", because a sick, injured or genetically flawed buck can be quite mature and have small, malformed or even no antlers. According to what I've been told, an injury to a buck's testicles (e.g., through fighting) can cause a malformed set of antlers that year -- his next set may grow normally if the injury heals but could be permanent if the injury left lasting damage. I'm not sure about the veracity of that idea, but it seems to be true based on many observations (even my own) and writing. So let's keep the original wording, but add somewhere that hunters defined "mature" by age, body size, weight and antlers (actually *just* age -- the other features usually accompany age and help us identify a "mature" buck in the field). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.163.31 (talk) 20:56, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Fawn Image (new)

Here is a picture I took of a fawn that appeared to be newly born. Use it somewhere if you want.

white-taled deer fawn in Winnetka, Illinois

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalmia (talk • contribs) 19:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

External Links Discussion

I am new to this and I hope I didn't affend anyone by breaking an established protocol when adding information or links to this page. I have now been warned that I am a commercial site and a spammer. This is not true nor was it my intent.I am coming to you to get your feedback. I am a very knowledgable hunter, especially when it comes to Whitetail Deer and can offer a lot of useful information. When I put my external link to "Sounds of the Whitetail", I did it because it is a collection of wave files of the actual sounds produced by bucks and does. Yes these files are on a sub page of my web site and yes there may be a google search box and ad but nowhere will you find me soliciting sales of audio tapes or CD's or anything for that matter. In the artical it discusses communications of deer and I simply wanted everyone to have a place to hear them. If you don't think this is a useful contribution I will discontinue any editing since anything I add will certainly be seen as spam. Take a look at the page and give me your feedback. Is it of any interest to the public or not? Sounds of the Whitetail Deer

Thanks and again I am sorry- Eric Stacy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericstacy (talk • contribs) 16:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

As I'm sure you know from having read the various guidelines I posted for you on your talk page, external links have a very restricted purpose on Wikipedia. Unfortunately for you, adding links to your site on pages as diverse as Specimens of Bushman Folklore, Karoo National Park and Telescopic sight is not among those stated purposes. Specifically to the White-tailed deer page and to the question you've posed, since you claim to be the owner of the copyright on those sound files, you should look for a way to work them into the article. Quoting from WP:EL:

"If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it. Refer to the citation guideline for instructions on citing sources."

By the way, posting a link on Wikipedia to attract traffic to you site is a blatant conflict of interest. That specific page you point to may not be overburdened with ads but at the site's home page you're selling everything from ad space to clothing to guided hunts. It's clearly a commercial site. In any case, I welcome your apparent enthusiasm for hunting and for deer, etc. Please channel that enthusiasm into actually editing and improving the content of articles. Improving an article means expanding it, providing references, doing layout and following policies and guidelines. I know that that's a lot more work than slapping a few external links onto the end. Perhaps that's why, when I look at your contribs, I see that every single edit you've made has been to add links to your website? Anyway, thanks very much for your interest in Wikipedia and thanks, as well, for taking the time to post this question, here. Cheers! — Dave (Talk | contribs) 18:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Landmark paper on deer impact on vegetation

Just thought I'd throw this out there:

White-Tailed Deer Impact on the Vegetation Dynamics of a Northern Hardwood Forest

Stephen B. Horsley, Susan L. Stout and David S. DeCalesta

Ecological Applications, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Feb., 2003), pp. 98-118

DJLayton4 (talk) 15:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Raised importance rating

[2] An attempt is made to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic (and thus the immediate need to have a suitably well-written article on it). Topics which may seem obscure to a Western audience—but which are of high notability in other places—should still be highly rated.[3]SriMesh | talk 03:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Second opinion

Are the two bucks pictured in the White_tailed_deer#Behavior_and_reproduction (the picture in the middle of the section of the two bucks in velvet laying down--not the two bucks standing in water at the beginning) truly Odocoileus virginianus? The file is named: File:OdocoileusVirginianus2007-07-28male.JPG. It appears to be misidentified, but I thought I better ask for a second opinion--what's the saying: measure twice, cut once! Pinethicket (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with Pinethicket. The two bucks in question do not appear to be whitetail deer, based on facial features and coloring. Woodlot (talk) 13:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

FEMALE DEER WITH ANTLERS

What this article's writer associates with hermaphrodism, I also associate with hormonal trouble, as antlers could be a symptom of a loss of female hormone due to a disease. In any case, I've been aware for years of an incident where a hunter shot a doe with antlers by mistake. This was reported in Donald J. Sobol's ENCYCLOPEDIA BROWN'S BOOK OF THE WACKY OUTDOORS, from which this text was taken:

"There's a lot of buck in that doe. Richard A. Bauman of Gloucester, Massachusetts, illegally shot a female deer during the 1955 buck season. Game commission officials let him get away with it. Bauman had made an honest mistake.

"His 200-pound doe had a full set of antlers, the first ever reported on a female deer in the white-tailed deer population." (Sobol, page 40) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.159.26 (talk) 17:11, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Incomplete sentence

"Does make maternal grunts when searching for their bedded fawns." I don't know what the subject of the sentence is, im guessing "mother" or something like that but i don't want edit it and have it be wrong. somebody who can figure it out should look into fixing this or removing the sentence altogether. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.65.217.167 (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The subject is "Does", adult female deer. The word "maternal" might be considered superfluous since what else would a mother doe grunt when searching for her fawns. Dger (talk) 22:10, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

haha i'm stupid. thx Dger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.65.217.167 (talk) 02:37, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

No. I read it that way the first time too. I reworded the sentence so that it can't be read incorrectly. Dger (talk) 02:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

There is vandalism on this page - something to the effect of "kill them and feed them to the hobos" but I can't find it in the "edit" section. I've never edited wikipedia, so could someone with more experience do this? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.201.22.10 (talk) 18:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

It's gone. It probably was reverted by a previous editor. Dger (talk) 01:03, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

In the 'Diet' section - a line about 'likes the fresh taste of penis' - not visible in the 'edits' section - can someone fix? 173.48.40.237 (talk) 02:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Hunting deer

This article needs more information about the hunting season and how the deer are hunted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucaspark57 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on White-tailed deer

Cyberbot II has detected links on White-tailed deer which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global

If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally.

When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.

Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.change.org/petitions/reintroduce-the-cougar-to-the-eastern-us

  Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Item was removed. Dger (talk) 02:24, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Domestication

I don't know the extent of scientific papers on this, but there now is a published book (ISBN 1942872100) documenting an extensive example of domestication. While I haven't read the book thoroughly yet, I do know that the author not only has stated in other media the progress of the domestication throughout the years but has also has strongly recommended against domestication in most other circumstances, including in other actual attempted instances which have been noted in the media. I don't know if this would be credible or universal enough to be included in the article but I wanted to note at least that a successful instance of domestication does exist. Mapsax (talk) 00:12, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

In the eight years since I wrote this, the deer in question died, so there is now a verifiable lifespan from reliable sources (local obituary, national belated obituary). That information may add to the notability. There's also a National Geographic article from April 2014 that I didn't mention above at the time that could be included as a RS for general information (subscription-only repost). (Full disclosure: I visited the deer three times.) Mapsax (talk) 01:21, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on White-tailed deer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120620063955/http://www.science.smith.edu/msi/pdf/i0076-3519-388-01-0001.pdf to http://www.science.smith.edu/msi/pdf/i0076-3519-388-01-0001.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:17, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Competing species ... I think?

The article says, "Populations of deer around the Great Lakes have also expanded their range northwards, due to conversion of land to agricultural uses favoring more deciduous vegetation, and local caribou and moose populations." Should that read "... and reductions in local caribou and moose populations."? I would change it, but I'm honestly not sure of the original author's intent. As written it's not meaningful. IAmNitpicking (talk) 11:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

West-focused

Why is so much of this article written from the perspective of the West US? Every mention of geography is made in relation to the Rocky Mountains. This is confusing considering the deer population is practically a gradient going from the East-coast states travelling west. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.123.167.48 (talk) 17:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Other Information

With taxidermy as prevalent as it is with deer, there should be a section in this Article about the process of taxidermy and the different opinions of mounting an animal. Many proud hunters use taxidermy to show off their kill, while others view it as unethical.Jforrestlee (talk) 01:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

I found that Tprooney3 (talk · contribs) added a couple of references that matches his name. So there is a potential conflict of interest. He had also signed himself as "Tom Rooney" as evident by this --Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 16:23, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2021 and 16 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jmm00007.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Migration

Whitetails don’t migrate at all. Most spend their entire lives within 2-3 miles of where they were born. The migration issue is a mule deer issue. 166.216.159.232 (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: California Natural History

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2022 and 2 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mariali4502 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Mariali4502 (talk) 03:38, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

weird description

"Venison, or deer meat, is a natural, organic, and nutritious form of lean animal..."

Why is venison described as natural and organic? Isn't any food that comes from an animal organic? This means basically nothing and sounds like an ad Pepto!! Bysmol!! (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

I suspect it means organic in the narrower sense but that's a meaningless/redundant statement when the animal lives wild. And, yeah, I doubt anyone thinks that deer provide unnatural meat, so I don't think that needs saying. I've amended the text, and requested citations for the specific claims made. Anaxial (talk) 20:47, 26 October 2022 (UTC)