Talk:A Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Birds Low‑importance

A Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Polynesia Low‑importance

	Oceania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia 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.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hawaii Low‑importance

	Hawaii portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hawaii 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.HawaiiWikipedia:WikiProject HawaiiTemplate:WikiProject HawaiiHawaii articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Deletion discussion prompted by speedy tag

Sorry, this doesn't meet the criteria for speedy (or any other form of) deletion.

Criterion 2 "The book has been the subject of multiple, independent, non-trivial reviews in works meeting our standards for reliable sources" is easily met

I note that the nominator cites "lack of notability" as a problem, but this is addressed in the article's first paragraph.

SP-KP 17:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, try to convince that it meets Wikipedia:Notability (books). simply because it has an isbn doesn't mean it's noable. and remember, this is't personal . also how does the first paragraph prove anything? thanks. hope to hear from you soon.--Tainter 17:23, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I'm not clear on why you suggest that the reason cited for notability is that the book has an ISBN as I didn't say that above or in the article or in the message on your talk page notifying you of the contested deletion.

To repeat what I said above, the book has been the subject of "multiple, independent, non-trivial reviews in works meeting our standards for reliable sources". The first paragraph's last sentence is the relevant one regarding this book's other reason for notability. SP-KP 17:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but you still haven't proven anything. Show me the reliable reviews and/or sources. Claims aren't sources. --Tainter 17:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If not deleted then at least this article needs to be renamed to its actual title: A Field Guide to the Birds of Hawaii and the Tropical Pacific (note capitalization). --Tainter 17:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, you can verify the existence of one such review here:

[1]

Happy to look out some more, but hopefully this is enough to persuade you that I'm not making groundless claims?

I based my capitalisation on that given in the book's Library of Congress record, but no I've got no strong opinion on this, so no objection if you wanted to do something different. SP-KP 17:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In all honesty I don't really car about this article enough to continue this conversation. I will thouhg nominate it for renaming. A lot of the searches I have done have the forementioned capitalizatio, and I think it just looks better. --Tainter 18:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]