This   level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Death Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Animals Mid‑importance Scavenger is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Animals To-do: history watch purge Here are some Open Tasks : Copyedit: Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae), Requests: Mammals: Invertebrates: Campocraspedon Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species. Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration Sanitation Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sanitation, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sanitation 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.SanitationWikipedia:WikiProject SanitationTemplate:WikiProject Sanitationsanitation articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 September 2018 and 28 November 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spc13. Peer reviewers: Sjh1917, TallGuy117.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 08:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

This page is currently discussing two different topics: the feeding mode of certain animals and a means of livelihood of some persons. The latter is also discussed on a different page, waste picker, so I would like to move that information from this page to there. What do people think? Justinleif 01:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

I'd say go for it, especially since there is a page already, though it'll turn this poor page into a stub. Either that or merge that one here, though that could get confusing. - Bbik 06:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC) reply

The page seems to be broken. I tried to revert the last change (I wasn't logged, sorry), but an admin re-reverted it. Why? -- Manfroze 20:01, 30 August 2007 (UTC) reply

Can someone check the references in the article for support for this quote:

Such behavior is still witnessed today with men traveling great lengths at high speeds in order to avoid paying full price for food, preferring to scavenge out of the bins of the moderately wealthy.

The phrasing seems unusual... twilsonb ( talk) 21:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC) reply

i am a student of class 7c.i am from school st.mary's convent high school.i have got a project on survey of scavengers.i have the job of writing questionnaire on scavengers.please if u can then send the answer on this computer.by the way my name is sejal.R.wagh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.143.46.166 ( talk) 15:49, 13 September 2009 (UTC) reply

Should this page maybe have a warning about the graphic pictures? I mean those guys're pulling that horses skin off with their hands... And the cameras aimed at the inside of the horse. I don't know if Wikipedia has a style guideline on marking pages with graphic content or not, but I imagine there's rules about it somewhere. -- illumi ( talk) 18:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia is not censored. "Graphic" images, if illustrating the article content are acceptable. Boneyard90 ( talk) 00:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC) reply

Just popping in to compliment whoever wrote the Etymology section. It's fantastic. 24.130.190.8 ( talk) 05:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC) reply

I have reverted the removal of referenced material on stomach acidity in humans as a contributing factor in the lack of necrophagy. The reference does indicate scavengers have a much higher level of acidity. Ifnord ( talk) 19:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Please show where it says scavengers have much higher level of acidity. Andrew Harres ( talk) 22:45, 4 January 2020 (UTC) reply

From the reference, figure 1, "Different letters above error bars represent statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) using ANOVA and Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test. Obligate scavengers (1.3 ± 0.08), facultative scavengers (1.8 ± 0.27), generalist carnivore (2.2 ± 0.44), omnivore (2.9 ± 0.33), specialist carnivore (3.6 ± 0.51), hindgut herbivore (4.1 ± 0.38) and foregut herbivore (6.1 ± 0.31)." The actual illustration in the article conveys this quite clearly. Ifnord ( talk) 01:38, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

I believe you're misinterpreting figure 1. That chart simply categorizes these groups by the animal's natural feeding behavior, grouping humans with omnivores and displaying the typical stomach acid. If you read the article and look at table 1, this all becomes very clear.

"It is interesting to note that humans, uniquely among the primates so far considered, appear to have stomach pH values more akin to those of carrion feeders than to those of most carnivores and omnivores."

"Baboons (Papio spp) have been argued to exhibit the most human–like of feeding and foraging strategies in terms of eclectic omnivory, but their stomachs–while considered generally acidic (pH = 3.7)–do not exhibit the extremely low pH seen in modern humans (pH = 1.5) [38]. One explanation for such acidity may be that carrion feeding was more important in humans (and more generally hominin) evolution than currently considered to be the case (although see [39])."

Excerpts from table 1:

• Mammalia Artiodactyla brocket deer Mazama sp. herbivore/foregut 5.5
• Mammalia Artiodactyla hippo Hippopotamus amphibius herbivore/hindgut 4.4
• Mammalia Primates baboon Papio cynocephalus omnivore 3.7
• Aves Galliformes chicken Gallus gallus domesticus specialist carnivore/Insect 3.7
• Mammalia Primates humans Homo sapiens omnivore 1.5
• Aves Falconiformes peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus facultative scavenger 1.8
• Aves Strigiformes snowy owl Nyctea scandiaca generalist carnivore 2.5
• Aves Accipitriformes white backed vulture Gyps africanus obligate scavenger 1.2
• Mammalia Artiodactyla sheep Ovis aries herbivore/foregut 4.7
• Mammalia Perissodactyla horse Equus ferus caballus herbivore/hindgut 4.4
• Mammalia Carnivora dog Canis lupus familiaris (beagle) facultative scavenger 4.5
• Mammalia Carnivora cat Felis catus generalist carnivore 3.6

Andrew Harres ( talk) 02:14, 5 January 2020 (UTC) reply

The article defines scavengers as "animals that consume dead organisms that have died from causes other than predation." Many of the most familiar scavengers feed largely on organisms that have been killed by predation. For example, readers will be familiar with images of vultures picking at the carcass of a zebra that has been killed, and partly consumed, by lions: is that not scavenging?

And yet by that definition, scavenging applies where it is not usually thought to: if adults of a species feed dependent young with what they have foraged, is the offspring a scavenger?

Is every human who consumes meat from a catering outlet or shop a scavenger? They are eating an organism that dies from a cause other than predation. Is eating in a fancy restaurant really scavenging? Kevin McE ( talk) 11:51, 19 May 2020 (UTC) reply

The article says:

     The interaction between scavenging animals and humans is seen today most commonly in suburban settings with animals such as opossums, polecats and raccoons.

It is not clear what dead animals opossums, polecats, and raccoons eat or how this activity constitutes interaction with humans. Also, opossums and raccoons are also founding urban settings. I know because I live in one that has them. Rmrwiki ( talk) 06:29, 7 December 2022 (UTC) reply

wikilink Necrophagy inside the text returns back to the current article; if so and provided the above equation is valid; then intro sentence should include Scavenger or necrophagy in some form. no? Araz Zeyniyev ( talk) 12:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply