Talk:Piping shrike

clarification on official status needed

This sentence - Although the image of the piping shrike is readily identified with South Australia, the bird in its own right has never been formally adopted as a faunal or bird emblem of the state. - does not seem to concur with any of the links/sources at the bottom, none of which mention the bird is not official, so...where did this info come from? Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:17, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure of my thinking at the time, but I was possibly influenced by this list which shows it as unofficial. This SA Government site shows the insignia and emblems and dates of adoption for each. For the Hairy-Nosed Wombat it states it was "adopted by the Government as the faunal emblem of South Australia on 27 August 1970" and the Leafy Seadragon was "adopted by the Government as the marine emblem of South Australia on 8 February 2001" etc. There is no mention of the Piping Shrike or White Backed Magpie being adopted as a bird emblem, only that it is symbollically incorporated into the State Badge. Melburnian (talk) 01:22, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting - the site is a Charles sturt University page, so no idea where the sourcing comes from. The other thing that occurred to me is the distinction between the badge with the piping shrike (which is unequivocally official) and that it may not actually apply to the bird itself (or somesuch). Interesting. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes agree with the distinction, the badge which depicts the Piping Shrike is an official emblem, while the bird itself, as far as I can tell, has never been officially gazetted as a faunal or bird emblem. Melburnian (talk) 05:55, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Identity of the Piping Shrike

Regarding the statement, While some think it resembles the "Murray Magpie" (Grallina cyanoleuca) government sources identify the bird as the White-backed Magpie (Gymnorhina tibicen telonocua formerly Gymnorhina tibicen leuconota), the image in question is clearly a pied butcherbird (Cracticus nigrogularis). This species has a singularly beautiful piping call, as well as feather patterning consistent with the image. 121.215.187.215 (talk) 11:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

• It is true it does not resemble an Australian Magpie of any ssp. All such have entirely black body underparts. On the other hand, the Pied Butcherbird's range excludes most of South Australia, and particularly the SE and the area around Adelaide. This being the case, it is unlikely to be this species. The most likely candidate is the Magpie-lark ("Murray Magpie", Grallina cyanoleuca). The male has a similar extent of black on the throat as does the Pied Butcherbird, (both have more throat black than the emblem!) and its underwings are black with white coverts - as can be seen on the emblem on magnification. And it is common in most of South Australia. Of course the emblem's yellow bill matches none of the above! Ptilinopus (talk) 00:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

  As per the comment I made below, once you realise that it is the back of the bird, there is only one bird it can be, a White Backed Magpie. It cannot be confused with any other Australian bird.

  I can understand why people have made the mistake: but they have to remember it is the back of the bird. Compare the White Backed Magpie photo which its wings outstretched in the article to the original painting. The Magpie Lark can be immediately eliminated as all Magpie Larks have black backs (from the rump to the head).

  The names Piping and Shrike have been associated with Australian Magpies since the early days of Australian settlement, but never with the Magpie Lark (except in error). The name Piping even appears in the Latin name for the Australian Magpie, Gymnorhina Tibicen (Tibicen can be translated as piper or flute player) in response to its melodious call. The Australian Magpie has been recognised as one of the most vocally complex birds in the world, so it is no woinder that it has Tibicen in its Latin name and Piping in its common name. Adastral (talk) 04:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

  To clarify my last sentence: I was referring to the use of the name "Piping" in previous common names (eg, Gould: Piping Crow Shrike) and also in SA, as in the local name Piping Shrike for the WBM and as per it's name on the state ensignia. Adastral (talk) 05:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

This image is confusing because of the orientation of the bird. It is showing the rear of the "white-backed magpie". All early documentation clearly points to the image as being of the white-backed magpie and occasioanlly known as the piping shrike. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.103.141.100 (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

I have done some significant updates to this article. I have included relevant references. Please review and let me know your thoughts. Hopefully, the new text, particularly with review of the references, make it clear.

Unfortunately, there is a lot of misinformation and confusion apparent on the web. I think the confusion has come about when people didn’t realise that the image always shows the back of the bird. Once you realise it’s the back of the bird, it is very clear that it is the White Backed Magpie and cannot be confused with any other Australian bird. Two major sources of misinformation are the ABC podcast summary "does our state emblem, the piping shrike, actually exist" - the podcast summary has numerous errors. Despite Professor Kaplan providing advice that she was quoted out of context; the ABC has not corrected the errors. The other organisation is the State Bank of SA. They have clearly got the wrong bird. Likewise, they have been told but haven't fixed their problem. Adastral (talk) 04:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Piping shrike. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120716230046/http://www.premcab.sa.gov.au/emblems/shrike1.htm to http://www.premcab.sa.gov.au/emblems/shrike1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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} 04:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I have removed the link to the Magpie Lark, since it is not the Piping Shrike and could cause confusion if listed. I have added links to the Australian Magpie BirdLife Australia and Birds SA websites. I have added a jpeg of a comparison of the White Backed Magpie and Magpie Lark to the original painting of the Piping Shrike. That alone, should confirm that the WBM is the Piping Shrike, and the ML is not. Please review and let me know your thoughts, or additional ideas. Adastral (talk) 04:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)