Talk:Wing-assisted incline running

Possible Suggestions for Improvement

Adding a section for which specific species or other types of birds engage in WAIR other than Galliforms (chukar partridge), the rock dove and the Australian Brushturkey.

Add to the Response section, adding additional hypotheses/data why WAIR might not be a step in the evolution of avian flight.

Add a section specifically to the chukar partridge, as there is a lot of information and specific studies that could be added in terms of the development, mechanics and aerodynamics of WAIR in this species of bird. Gruhl.1 (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This topic (Wing-assisted incline running) has a huge number of sources available that reference it, and continues to be referenced and disputed in paleontological literature. (Google books: 200 results Google scholar: 166 results) It has been in need of its own expanded article for quite some time. Given the chance I will make sure its notability is properly reflected in the article. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 17:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

My main motivation to create an article on this topic comes from a recent resurgence in opposition to WAIR as a valid mechanism of the evolution of flight, which was presented last fall at SVP and can be found in the abstract book (page 113). I think that outlining both support and criticism of a theory in the main Origin of avian flight article would be a bit unwieldy, hence the need for its own separate article. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Additionally: WAIR is a concept that also exists outside of paleontology/origin of flight, as it is used to describe a mode of locomotion in modern birds (Dial first studied chukar chicks, for example). This could be fully explored in a separate article, but is somewhat off-topic in the main Origin of avian flight article. -Ferahgo the Assassin (talk) 17:44, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

(Repost of my arguments from WikiProject Dinosaurs.) I don't think Wing-assisted incline running yet deserves its own article, and believe the proper place to expand coverage of the WAIR (and other models) is Origin of avian flight. None of the models currently have content long enough nor divergent enough in scope to warrant a separate article. Per WP:SPLIT guidelines, an article less than 40kb doesn't warrant a length-related split, and Origin of avian flight is less than 18kb. Furthermore, a split requires a reader to refer to two different articles to get adequate context and background information, and someone reading Wing-assisted incline running might falsely assume WAIR and the cursorial model are the only proposed models. Lastly, the fact that both the Wing-assisted incline running lead and DYK nomination mention Kenneth Dial by name suggest the possibility or appearance of undue coverage or promotion of a particular person's views (although I am not accusing anyone of such, merely recognizing the possibility in interest of WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE). In the interest of balanced, comprehensive, centralized coverage, I think flight models should be discussed in a single article, and only split if their size and/or content radically necessitates it. I think a redirect to Origin of avian flight is preferable to outright deletion.--Animalparty-- (talk) 18:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

After doing some reading, I now support WAIR as a separate article, not due to size but to nature of content: As Ferahgo the Assassin alluded to above, "Wing-assisted incline running" actually represents two distinct things: 1) a real behavior documented in extant birds ("WAIR"), and 2) a hypothesis or model inferred for the evolution of flight (the "WAIR hypothesis"). The behavioral aspect should be given increased coverage, since it has been extensively studied by direct experimentation. WAIR and the WAIR hypothesis should be clearly distinguished, but should be discussed in the same article since the hypothesis is based primarily on the behavior.--Animalparty-- (talk) 04:41, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

As for coverage of the support and criticism of a model being unwieldy, that can likely be addressed by summary style and structural/compositional choices. E.g. rather than list every paper for or against a theory, and their respective internal details, an encyclopedic summary can be condensed into a few paragraphs structured as "Most studies support X such as (selected examples), while a few studies Support Y such as (selected examples)." References to relevant review articles can further increase the coverage and balance of evidence without going into potentially unnecessary detail.--Animalparty-- (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

There is good reason for the recent resurgence of opposition to WAIR and the other models that theorize flight evolving from the ground up. Longrich et al. (2012)[1] provides strong evidence against WAIR, cursorial and pouncing theories. For birds to take flight from the ground, the primary wing feathers need to separate during the upstroke, to allow air to pass between feathers [2]. Separation of primary feathers is necessary for low-speed flapping flight, hovering, and wing-assisted incline running. [3] Longrich et al., 2012 showed that overlapping feathers of Anchiornis and Archaeopteryx were not able to separate which would have made it difficult to take off from the ground, without hindering the ability to glide from an elevated position.[4] The Longrich paper is supported by Xu. (2012)[5] If we are going avoid misinformation and present the flight theories from a neutral point of view, then we need to acknowledge the evidence for and against each of the theories.Oviraptorbill (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

@Oviraptorbill: I agree that balanced perspectives are necessary. This often comes from secondary review articles as opposed to original reports, and such sources are preferred per WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If you have a recent source(s) that discusses the relative strengths and weaknesses of various origin of flight hypotheses (especially WAIR), please post it, or feel free to contribute to this article. The Xu 2012 "dispatch" provides some additional context, but mainly introduces and summarizes Longrich et al 2012 and so is not really a review article, nor an additional study providing independent support or lack thereof. It is also important to point out that Longrich et al limit their study to Archaeopteryx and Anchiornis and so inferences on flight or flapping behavior should be similarly constrained. A proposed preclusion of WAIR in two genera may or may not preclude its involvement in other theropods or basal birds. --Animalparty-- (talk) 21:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)