Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 22

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25

GA/FA update

OK, to see if we can make 50 FAs, Jim's nuthatch looks pretty good, and Red-necked Grebe is not far behind. Indigo Bunting is also at GAN, and Ara (genus) (good to see a group as such) is looking good too. Others being worked upon? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I guess I could get antbird through after a weekend of work (calls needs expansion and soem corrections). It would need a copyedit first. A bit longer term would be cuckoo and swallow. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
White-breasted Nuthatch is about ready for FAC, I'd welcome any final comment or edits before launching it. I'm doing the GA for Indigo Bunting, but Jude seems to have disappear three-quarters of the way through the review. Anyone want to pick up the remaining points, I don't want to fail an article that just needs tweaking. I'm quite busy at the moment, so the grebe may be a little while yet. Sabine's Sunbird, do you have access to Turner and Rose? If not, I've got it. jimfbleak (talk) 09:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
It's frustrating. I don't have sources for Indigo Bunting :( Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
No, I'm working from the family text on HBW. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:44, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I've got Turner and Rose; if you want me to add anything from that source, let me know! MeegsC | Talk 22:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
I should be okay, as Turner wrote the HBW entry as well. I'd appreciate people keeping an eye out for a really good picture of a swallow or martin in flight though. None of the ones I have found match the qualityt of the perched birds. I am trying to have a good mix of New World and Old world photos, as well as a suitable number of African species (since that is where they are supposed to be from.). Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:53, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Bird List Updates

Another question I have is rearding updating State/Country Lists. I know the AOU the ABA, and most US states update lists yearly. I've updated some lists with most current info, especially for featured lists. I've chosen to keep track of some, but I'm not sure if I want to keep track of all. My question is for featured lists. At what point, if updates are not done, should those lists be defeatured????????? Hope I'm not opening a "can of worms".................Pvmoutside (talk) 18:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we should all adopt a list. Something like the NA list gets updated yearly (or more frequently than that even), so would need yearly updates for sure. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:57, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Woodpeckers piculets and wrynecks

Would it be appropriate to rename the article Picidae Woodpecker (and rename the Woodpecker article Picinae)? This comes back to older discussions about the naming of families, subfamilies and genera, if I said piculets or wrynecks were types of woodpecker would you agree or disagree? Given the relative positions of woodpecker (49) and Picidae (963) working up that familiy article would be more worthwhile if it was sitting at the most commonly visited namespace, and HBW's entry for the family is at woodpecker. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

To push things along I have proposed the move. Please voice opinions at Talk:Picidae#Proposed move. Note that if approved I promise to push the family article to GA status within a month! Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
How would you handle Anserinae, Anatidae-Ducks Geese and Swans in this model???????etc........ Just a question?.....Pvmoutside (talk) 17:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Ducks geese swans are a major puzzle and no mistake. Because duck is a high traffic article I've been improving it's overall quality but it may make sense to have Anatidae at duck. But that would be a more controversial move than woodpecker so I am not proposing it yet. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I have moved the article, so now begins the race to GA! Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Tally-ho! Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Systematic_bias

PS: there appears to be some concern over too many US-related hooks nommed at DYK...so...(hint hint) big opportunity to address that with some bird article expansions. Remember multiplying stubs by 5x.. :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll destub something later today, I have just the thing. But DYK has become annoying of late - one editor demanded that I provide chunks of text from the source I was citing, and then added the text when I refused. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
There, I've destubbed and nominated the South and Central American potoos. Actually have some more to add to it, but it is a start. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Bird for identification at Bali Bird Park

Bird at Bali Bird Park for identification. Snowman (talk) 12:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Its identification can be found among the tags; Paradisaea apoda. A male. • Rabo³ • 13:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. It is better than the other images of this species on the wiki, so I have linked it in the infobox. Snowman (talk) 14:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Arini parrots for identification

1) Amazona farinosa. 2) Amazona viridigenalis. 3) Amazona aestiva. 4) Confirmed (notice the strikingly handsome wing-pattern with deep blue primary coverts and outer webs to the primaries). 5) Ara militaris (here assuming that the adjacent photos in that photo-stream involve the same). 6) Beak disease - I guess so (fungal?). Whatever it is, it certainly looks bad. 7) I guess it is correct. Not a perfect illustration, but on the other hand I can't come up with a better match, and considering that it is from Histoire Naturelle des Perroquets I think it's fair to assume it is correct. 8) Confirmed, but the feathers are rather messy (far more than usual in this species in the wild). • Rabo³ • 18:57, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

That is fine; I will to the relevant uploads and linking.

  • 3. yellow on wings; Does it have a subspecies name?
  • 4. blue-wings; Is is possible to identify subspecies?
  • 8. mess on face; So not like juvenile colours? - Snowman (talk) 21:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine:

  • 3. The "Blue-fronted Amazon" article would benefit from a taxonomy section.
  • 7. It seems odd to me that the "Black-billed Parrot" illustration shows a pale beak. Snowman (talk) 21:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • 5. Subspecies of this; I doubt it (though seeing it was photographed in Mexico... there's a reason why local species predominate in zoo's and alike in the Neotropics, Africa and Asia). Some have even expressed doubts over the validity of the some of the currently recognized subspecies.
  • 7. Misleadingly, the Black-billed Amazon does not always have an entirely black bill. One example and another. Juv's & imm's are entirely pale-billed (even paler than on the illustration).
  • 8. No, not juv. They have a darker, browner iris, and don't have the mess on the throat. • Rabo³ • 09:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Oops, had switched them in my last comment. Now corrected in the above. #4 is nominate as noted by Sabine's Sunbird. • Rabo³ • 12:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Amazona oratrix xanthopteryx does not exist. It is Amazona aestiva xanthopteryx, and it is not a synonym of A. barbadensis.
  • 9. Amazona auropalliata (a bit easier to identify from the next photo in that photo-stream). Assuming it is a pure subspecies (which is a big assumption when dealing with a captive individual of a complex that is well known for being able to hybridize absolutely freely) it would be nominate.
  • 10. Same as previous.
  • 11. Amazona f. festiva.
  • 12. Amazona farinosa. • Rabo³ • 16:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • 3. Whoops; yes, it is uploaded here: Image:Amazona aestiva -yellow on wings-4.jpg.
  • 9. I had not seen the parrot in the following flickr image where some yellow can be seen on its nape. I am not sure if it should be uploaded or not. Does it look like a hybrid?
  • 10. Fine, as on the Elmwood Park Zoo's list.
  • 11. I was looking at Lilac-crowned Amazon (Amazona finschi), and Festive Amazon (Amazona festiva), and I was not sure if it could be anything else. It is obvious now, I will upload it to commons at a Festive Amazon.
  • 12. Elmwood Park Zoo does not have an Mealy Amazon (Amazona farinosa), but they have a Yellow-crowned Amazon (amazona ochrocephala). After considering both Mealy and Yellow-crowned, I think it is more likely to be a Yellow-crowned Amazon. Are there any more opinions on 12? - Snowman (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
9) No, it does not look like a hybrid, but with these birds in captivity you just never know. 12) Elmwood Park Zoo need to update their page, because they evidently do have a Mealy Amazon. That identification is 100% certain. I have received so many questions from people that couldn't separate these species in South America that I ended up being tired of writing the same again and again, and instead just wrote a section to the wiki article that I can refer people to. It's the last section under Description in Mealy Amazon. It gives all the hints you need for separating the above bird from Yellow-crowned. • Rabo³ • 20:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • 9. Uploaded to commons with cautious note in description
  • 12. ok, I had uploaded it as a Mealy Amazon and then as a Yellow-crowned Amazon (after reading the zoo webpage). I have tagged the Yellow-crowned version of the same image for deletion from commons. It is a good high resolution image; it is possible to identify the subspecies? Do you see any other mistakes in the commons categories for the Yellow-crowned Amazon or Mealy Amazon or Yellow-headed Amazon? Snowman (talk) 21:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately, other than saying it is one of the South American, it isn't possible with any level of certainty. Essentially the same problem as the Mealy we spoke about some time ago. I'm a bit busy right now, but will have a look at the Amazona's in commons as soon as time allows. • Rabo³ • 16:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
It's a Yellow-headed Amazon. Probably nominate oratrix, but as it, as noted earlier for this complex, really is a group where there has been fairly extensive intraspecific hybridization in the captive population, and there also has been fairly extensive breeding aimed at the single goal of making them look "prettier", it is probably a case where saying it looks like a nominate oratrix is more sensible than actually saying it is a pure individual of that subspecies. • Rabo³ • 13:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
On the "Yellow-crowned Amazon" page, in the taxonomy list, I am not sure if "o." or "o/a" stands for ochrocephala or oratrix. Snowman (talk) 14:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
As mentioned in the article, the members of the auropalliata group are sometimes considered subspecies of Amazona ochrocephala, so the "o." for the members of the auropalliata group stands for ochrocephala. Comparably, as also mentioned in the article, the members of the oratrix group sometimes are considered subspecies of Amazona ochrocephala. However, as both oratrix and ochrocephala starts with an o, you can limit it to just writing "o." rather than the somewhat peculiar "o./o." • Rabo³ • 15:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
But "o./o." would be clearer, I think. And it goes without saying that the "o." in the nominate group stands for "ochrocephala" only? Snowman (talk) 22:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, IMO that goes without saying, considering that the taxonomic section explains the situation (one species, A. ochrocephala, versus three), and this sort of abbreviation is standard in biology. As for the use of "o." versus "o./o.", that is far from being something I feel strongly about (even if I think the latter looks a bit weird), and if someone do, that person should - of course - feel entirely free to edit it. • Rabo³ • 23:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
I have amended the abbreviation. The trouble was that the same "o." stood for "o." or "o./o." depending on where in the page it appeared in a well written page. I nearly added a footnote for "o./o.", but I think it is clear. In line with this, I have called this group (a./o., o./o. and o.) one species, the "Yellow-crowned Amazon", on the "List of amazon parrots" page with links to the pages on the other two groups in the description. I guess this is accurate and I am (60/40) happy with it, but it might be confusing to some. Would it be better to split it into three species for the "List of amazon parrots" page? Snowman (talk) 09:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd suggest splitting them on the List of amazon parrots (though with a note on taxonomy), as most authorities (still) maintain them as separate species, and they have separate articles on wikipedia. If the articles for auropalliata and oratrix - at some point - are merged into A. ochrocephala, we'd be in a different situation. That said, there is another thing I find highly problematic on the list of amazon parrots page. Each species has a description section in the list, and each of these have a ref. linking to the individual species BirdLife International page. However, there are only descriptions on the BirdLife International pages dealing with threatened species. So, it it is claimed that the description of e.g. the White-fronted Amazon, Red-lored Amazon, Blue-cheeked Amazon, Festive Amazon, etc, etc, are supported by the indicated BirdLife International ref's, but that is simply not true. A lack of references can be problematic, but indicating a ref. supports something when it really doesn't - that's far worse. • Rabo³ • 15:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
ok, I have made amendments. Snowman (talk) 17:09, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Todo

Stiphrornis pyrrholaemus http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-08/s-ssd081508.php Shyamal (talk) 12:42, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh a big change in science! "Usage Restrictions: None" on the images. Shyamal (talk) 12:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
We need a clean-up of the Stiphrornis articles. This new species was described primarily on the basis of the species limits proposed by Beresford, P. & Cracraft, J. (1999). Speciation in African forest robins (Stiphrornis): species limits, phylogenetic relationships, and molecular biogeography. American Museum Novitates, 3270, 1–22. I haven't really looked deeply into this, but HBW 10 does not follow the split of Stiphrornis erythrothorax, writing: "Races appear to differ vocally, but recent treatment as four separate species [S. erythrothorax, S. gabonensis, S. xanthogaster and S. sanghensis] perhaps premature." A long time since I read that paper, but if I remember right (which isn't certain), they used the phylogenetic species concept (no surprise when Cracraft was one of the authors). Regardless, as this new species is so closely tied to the Beresford & Cracraft review of this complex, the question remains - have they shown that the new species is a biological species or "only" a phylogenetic species? Right now on wiki we peculiarly have two species (Stiphrornis sanghensis and Stiphrornis erythrothorax), which doesn't make sense at all. The question therefore remains. How many species should we recognize and which? Only one (S. erythrothorax with remaining as subspecies), all five (S. erythrothorax, S. gabonensis, S. xanthogaster, S. sanghensis & S. pyrrholaemus), or somewhere in between? As said, I haven't really looked deeply into this, but that's a question we probably need to answer before the page for the new taxon is started. • Rabo³ • 15:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I haven't looked at this yet, but I suspect that the paper describing the new species reviews the state of the genus. But new species are neat and allowing us to use the images of an obscure forest bird is even better! Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I still haven't looked more thoroughly through it to see if there are any oddities, but their phylogenetic tree shows the new taxon placed smack right in the middle of Stiphrornis erythrothorax sensu lato, i.e. only a species if S. erythrothorax is split up. • Rabo³ • 21:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Aviculture article and

The Aviculture could do with some going over by those more familiar with it, could be quite controversial so would be nice to get it polished and neutral. For the record, Snowman nominated for the essentially synonymous Cagebird trade for deletion, but I guess it could have been a simple redirect. I voted so can't close it but would be straightforward to get some further consensus. Anyone have a differing opinion on it? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I guess that it will be made into a redirect. I thought I would made it a formal request and be cautious, just in case anyone spoke up for the page. Sometimes, ones edits are reverted when it is least expected. There might be another formal process for changing a page to a redirect, but I could not say were it is at present. Snowman (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
"Cagebird trade" article has been changed into a redirect. Snowman (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

FA/GA

  • Puerto Rican Amazon through FA, seven to go
  • Indigo Bunting - a reminder that I will have to fail this tomorrow if the outstanding concerns aren't picked up - they are all listed on the review page. Since it's not just minor copyedits, I can't really do the few remaining bits myself and then pass it. It's an easy GA. Thanks

jimfbleak (talk) 05:32, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Indigo Bunting fallen at the last hurdle jimfbleak (talk) 19:23, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

New WikiProject proposal: Biota of the UK and Ireland

I've proposed a new WikiProject named WikiProject Biota of the UK and Ireland which would encompass all species and conservation efforts within Britain, an extremely interesting area. The project would include vegetation classification, Category:Lists of British animals, Category:Conservation in the United Kingdom, Category:Ecology of the British Isles, Category:Forests and woodlands of the United Kingdom, Category:Fauna of the British Isles and anything else to do with the flora and fauna of Britain. If anyone is interested just leave your name on the proposal page. Cheers, Jack (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I've raised a query on the proposal page as to the capitalisation of the title of the project. Also, looking at the cats above, should it be "United Kingdom biota" or "Biota of the British Isles" anyway? British Isles, UK and Great Britain are not synonyms. Is it intended to include Eire and/or Northern Ireland? I've opposed this project as currently formulated. jimfbleak(talk) 05:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments, I've left a reply on the proposals page. Cheers, Jack (talk) 09:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The project will now be called WikiProject Biota of the UK and Ireland, it encompasses all species within the British Isles (which includes Ireland). Jack (talk) 01:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Black-backed Gull

Does this title have an unambiguous meaning? What about the Lesser Black-backed Gull and the Great Black-backed Gull? Should it perhaps be a disambiguation, or is the meaning clear? Richard001 (talk) 09:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Agree - I always thought the alternative name of the Kelp Gull was the Southern Black-backed Gull...so let's be bold..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Cas beat it too me, it should be a dab page. Sabine's Sunbird talk 09:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Just remember to add {{disambiguation}} at the end (I have made a few of these by now myself). Richard001 (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Arini parrots for identification (2)

14: Amazon f. festiva, 15: Alipiopsitta xanthops, 16: Amazona rhodocorytha. From the same flickr gallery this photo may also be of use, as we only have a single for Amazona brasiliensis, and the new photo shows the distinctive tail-pattern bettern. Similarly, this photo would be a nice addition to Knipolegus lophotes. • Rabo³ • 20:33, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Ahh, should have looked better. Despite being in the same photo-stream as the Alipiopsitta xanthops, the photo of the Knipolegus lophotes is "all rights reserved". • Rabo³ • 20:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
But he has another photo that may be of use: Lepidocolaptes angustirostris. • Rabo³ • 20:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I got the Image:Amazona brasiliensis -RSCF-4.jpg, and I will work on digital enhancement of the poor contrast on a different computer after a few days. Snowman (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The Lepidocolaptes angustirostris is in the infobox. Please check the text on the commons file. Snowman (talk) 21:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • 14. Fine.
  • 15. I am glad I brought this for discussion.
  • 16. It is odd that it was the only one labeled, and yet it was the only individual that was not what it said it was out of the steam. I think it occurs in four photos in the stream. I think that different images of the same species on the related official website are correct. Snowman (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
#16 was corectly labelled, but I suspect the taxonomy caused a bit of confusion. The Red-browed Amazon (or red-browed Amazon parrot as he calls it) is Amazona rhodocorytha. You suggested Amazona dufresniana rhodocorytha (i.e. a subspecies of A. dufresniana) in your initial post, but that taxonomy hasn't been used for 15+ years. Today dufresniana and rhodocorytha are considered separate species by just about everyone. • Rabo³ • 21:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Image:Amazona rhodocorytha -RSCF-6.jpg But this image on commons looks like a different species (or subspecies). It has dark red behind its crown and less yellow on its face, and it is just like the image on BirdLife International. There are several photographs of the odd (#16) one and the others in the stream. Why does #16 look different to all the others in the aviaries? Snowman (talk) 22:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
No, it is monotypic. They just have a pretty variable facial pattern with some having almost the entire face yellow, some having virtually no yellow, some having extensive blue on cheeks, some having very little, etc. The variation can be far more distinctive than that shown on any of these photos. Unfortunately, there was a slight misunderstanding for the photo you uploaded to Knipolegus lophotes. The flickr user did have a photo for that species (here), but as noted that photo was unfortunately "all rights reserved". The other photo, which you uploaded, shows Lepidocolaptes angustirostris. I guess the file should be renamed (a similar problem can be found for the file Image:Dendrocolaptes-cethia-1.jpg - see the text in the infobox below the photo). • Rabo³ • 22:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Tags added for repair work, so the repairs are underway. Snowman (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
16. I am still entirely convinced that it is the same as the others in the aviary, partly because you have not explained the absence of darker colour behind the crown that is on images of the Red-browed Amazon. With different face colouring and colouring behind the crown 16 looks to me like the whole of its head is different to the rest in the aviary and not just the face; hoverer, I have not seen many images to assess the variability in the species. So is Amazona dufresniana rhodocorytha of an old classification the same as Amazona rhodocorytha in a new classification? Snowman (talk) 09:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. By the way, whenever you upload the Alipiopsitta, don't replicate the mistake in Juniper and Parr's parrot book. A lack of yellow to the belly is not an indication of immaturity, as suggested by their illustrations. This is another species with extensive individual variation that is not directly related to age. • Rabo³ • 22:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • 15. Uploaded; the first photograph of its species for the wiki. It is getting harder and harder to find images for the remaining parrot species that do not have a photograph; nevertheless, several more have been added showing different features to add to existing photographs. Snowman (talk) 23:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you're right and I suspect there are some genera where we'll get little if anything (Nannopsittaca, Touit, Micropsitta, etc). But lots of other birds, e.g. Blue-naped Chlorophonia (photo - male), Epaulet Oriole (photo), Surucua Trogon (photo - male of the nominate subspecies. Yes, he calls it Trogon curucui, but he's wrong), Grey-fronted Dove (photo), Brown-crested Flycatcher (photo), Chestnut-bellied Euphonia (photo - female), Brassy-breasted Tanager (photo), Tropical Pewee (photo - the very dark nominate subspecies), Olivaceous Woodcreeper (photo - another case where it's worth mentioning that it's the nominate subspecies), Crescent-chested Puffbird (photo). And I'm sure that's just a small sample of the possibilities out there. Unless you know your Brazilian birds, just don't go randomly browsing in the photostream of the person who uploaded most of the just mentioned photos. Many nice photos, but also many mistaken identifications. Unless uploaded, I'll probably look into the above mentioned sometime in the future when I've had the time to get up-to-speed on commons. • Rabo³ • 00:29, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
The first (#17) is correctly identified. The second (#18) equals another genus covered; Graydidascalus. • Rabo³ • 14:02, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I did not identify 18, but I think I would probably identify the next Short-tailed Parrot (Graydidascalus). Snowman (talk) 22:50, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Both are Crimson-bellied. The first an adult, the second a sub-adult. • Rabo³ • 00:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Fine. "Sub-adult" is an expression that I could not find on the wiki. Snowman (talk) 09:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Red-necked Grebe

I've worked this up because of its image content, any comments before it swims to GA noms? jimfbleak (talk) 16:12, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

GA/FA news

Red-necked Grebe now at GAN, White-breasted Nuthatch still at FAC jimfbleak (talk) 06:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Malaconotoidea?

A couple of things on pages, as I was working on Australian Magpie and I read in the 2008 Christidis and Boles book about the Malaconotoidea group (Artamidae plus bush- and vanga shrikes, ioras and batises), which appeared in Cacraft 2004. Anyone with expert taxonomical knowledge know if this is a robust grouping that will stick around? As it is not on the Corvida page...and now Corvida is paraphyletic I was wondering what we should do, as the corvid radiation is an important discussion point. Thoughts? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Magpies Pass The Mirror Test

I know this may be slightly off-topic here but since this is a talk page and this is related to birds I hope I can be given a little latitude on this.

In case anyone didn't see it, there was an article in New Scientist regarding magpies being able to pass the mirror test. They claim that magpies are the first non-mammal found to pass the mirror test but I could swear that I saw something about pigeons passing the mirror test as well although I seem to recall that the finding was disputed.

Anyway, I thought this item might be of interest to the folks who contribute to this project and I hope people will forgive me if this is inappropriate to post here.--Onorio (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I am actually surprised. I came to learn of this quite some time ahead thanks to User:Rabo3 who posted a link to a German paper from 2000 on this topic. http://www.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/rubin/rbin2_00/pdf/artikel_n1_elstern.pdf and it seems pigeons joined this formerly elite club as well http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080613145535.htm I guess the bloggers and media folks would do well to watchlist articles on wikipedia ! Shyamal (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Translation

Vrijwilligers van Natuurpunt graven een ijsvogelwand in het Saleghem Krekengebied die nu jaar na jaar nesten herbergt. I think I know what this says, but would welcome a translation from someone who actually knows Dutch. 17:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Arctic birds and Wikipedia:WikiProject Arctic and Portal:Arctic

Would people here be able to help out with some work on Arctic birds? I (and others) have been working on Category:Arctic and Wikipedia:WikiProject Arctic and Portal:Arctic, but we really need someone who knows about birds and the Arctic to check out Category:Arctic birds and related areas. All I know is that things are complicated by many birds spending summer in the Arctic. Is it possible to get a list or category of birds that are resident in the Arctic, if there are any? Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 02:34, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Bird vision

So far I've adopted a fairly kitchen sink approach, bunging in anything I can find. What next? I would welcome comments on the structure of the article, what's missing, what needs expanding (or reducing). There is probably a better image for at least an owl's eyes/head. Could do with an illustration of a bird retina or its rods and cones, but beyond my capacity. I've done birds of prey/owls/waterbirds as the extended discussion bits because those are the most specialised and what the research seems to focus on. Do we need a section to cover passerines, pigeons etc (heading = land birds?) or is that covered by the general stuff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimfbleak (talk • contribs) 25 July 2008

Curl-crested toucans?

(See Image:Naturalist on the River Amazons figure 32.png for context)

What exactly are "curl-crested toucans"? I don't see any article on them here (though there are three other "curl-crested" birds), though they are surely some sort of toucan. Are they a specific species/genus that has lost its old name? Do we just not have an article on them? Richard001 (talk) 06:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

See Curl-crested Aracari. Maias (talk) 06:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Oh, of course, I should have looked at the other 'curl-crested' articles to see if they weren't the same thing. I have created a redirect from Curl-crested Toucan. The other two are Passeriformes. Richard001 (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Interesting picture. I presume it's of someone (Bates?) being mobbed by the toucans after shooting a specimen. It might be good to upload to the article. Maias (talk) 10:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
It's of Henry Bates, yes. I'm not sure of the details - I never got to read the book (too time consuming), so I can't provide much context. There is another nice picture of one as the next illustration, and a nice one of an umbrella bird: Image:Naturalist on the River Amazons figure 30.png. Richard001 (talk) 05:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ruddy Crake

I've just discovered that Ruddy crake is redirecting to Ruddy-breasted Crake, an Asian species. Here's where the problem with common names comes in, because Laterallus ruber, a New World species, is also (and primarily) known as Ruddy Crake—and thus needs its own article. Does anyone have a problem with me creating the article, or should I make a DAB page first? MeegsC | Talk 08:03, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Just found that Laterallus ruber is also redirecting there, despite the fact that the article is about Porzana fusca... MeegsC | Talk 08:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
The new English names standard at www.worldbirdnames.org suggests that Ruddy Crake is the new world species while Ruddy-breasted Crake is the old world one. Unfortunately, Ruddy Crake was used widely in the older South Asian bird guides, so it may be enough to use the template:otheruses4 at the top of the Ruddy Crake page. Shyamal (talk) 09:10, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
We already have an article about the New World species, Ruddy Crake. I've redirected Ruddy crake and Laterallus ruber there and put a note at the top of the page. Tigershrike (talk) 10:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Please be careful when using the term New World. It does not equal the Americas, and is problematic in this case. I've corrected the otheruses4 template on the Ruddy Crake page. • Rabo³ • 14:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
In a biogeographical sense it usually does... a New World warbler or New World monkey would by synonymous with American warbler or American monkey. It is in non-biological senses that New World includes Australia. Sabine's Sunbird talk 10:43, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Origin of avian flight

I notice that this article is fairly neglected - it had no birds banner and was only in an aerodynamics category. I have tried to address this, but I think it needs more work and integration with the article avian flight, which should link to it as a subarticle (i.e. {{main}}). I think the name could also be changed to 'origin and evolution of avian/bird flight' or perhaps simply 'evolution of avian flight'.

Also, I think a separate article on the evolution of flight should be written to cover all flight - in insects, bats and flying reptiles (including birds). This is mostly outside the scope of the project, but it does currently redirect to a bird article, which seems a bit ornithocentric. Richard001 (talk) 05:37, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The surge for 50

  1. White-breasted Nuthatch still at FAC
Congratulations, I see that this is now FA Grantus4504 (talk) 05:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
  1. Red-necked Grebe passed GA, any further comments before it joins the nuthatch?
  2. Common Kingfisher: only just starting this, but a help request. To get the map, I had to upload the map from the German FA to Commons, and I then cropped it and re-uploaded as a derivative of the Commons version. Could someone kindly check that I've completed the summary correctly?

jimfbleak (talk) 06:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

image use question

One of my favourite flickr photostreams recently posted this image of a Variable Antshrike female over what looks like a half completed nest. There isn't really a caption, but since the nest is clearly half made (and therefore not being robbed), is it safe to assume that the nest belongs to the bird in question? I would assume so,the architecture fits for the family, and would like to use it in the family article. I've been looking for a nest photo. Any thoughts? Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:35, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

FA Countdown

Six to go, will Red-necked Grebe make it five? jimfbleak (talk) 07:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Parrots for identification (3)

Possibly an immature male Australian King-Parrot? (usually have red-bills though) Aviceda talk 03:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
In Honduras?? Something about it doesn't look King Parroty -the bill is a little too big? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Must admit I know nothing about neo-tropical parrots but there are plenty of free-flying ferals in Australia, budgies etc in the US, we have king-parrots in the garden frequently but I see your POV. Aviceda talk 09:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I think it is an Arini. Snowman (talk) 09:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
23 is driving me nuts. I think the problem is that they are juvies. The birds to the left and right are clearly barely fledged, I think that the middle one is probably just the oldest of the brood. My computer connection is also playing up and crawling, but from what I can see most of the images are Asian birds. But the closest I can find is the Grey-cheeked Parakeet. The description in HBW is pretty vague for juvies but describes them as having green crowns, which fits. Sabine's Sunbird talk 09:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
23. I have been looking at "Grey-cheeked parakeet" for some time without being convinced that is one of them. I think it may be a staged photograph because of this. It may be in a coffee forest in Asia, India, or South America. I guess it may be a juvenile and this is a adult female. It may be an Asian parrot, perhaps a juvenile Psittacula. Snowman (talk) 09:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
A Superb Parrot I think. I have a photo somewhere I was going to upload on the page I uploaded. Gosh, I forgot about that :) ..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:46, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
It is more difficult that I first thought because the colours seem transformed slightly. That is an interesting suggestion. Snowman (talk) 16:55, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
21) Red-throated Parakeet. 22) Orange-winged. 23) Definitely juv. Psittacula, but I'll leave the exact species to someone else. 25) Plain Parakeet. 26) Yellow-shouldered. • Rabo³ • 14:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Yellow-shouldered being Amazona barbadensis? Snowman (talk) 14:44, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes. • Rabo³ • 15:06, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
2x Yellow-crowned. If uploading them, I'd suggest adding the localities (1st is from Peru, 2nd from Venezuela). • Rabo³ • 01:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Both 27 and 28 uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 10:24, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
The bad name file had been listed for deletion and so the link above should turn red. I have re-uploaded the file from flickr with the correct name at Image:Polytelis anthopeplus -aviary in Australia-3.jpg. Snowman (talk) 09:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
29) Blue-fronted and Mealy. 30) Regent Parrot (I've made sure it isn't used anywhere under the wrong name, but haven't corrected the identification under the file itself in commons - I presume the file should be renamed). 31) ID correct. • Rabo³ • 00:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Amendments and re-labeling underway. I have listed "Image:Aratinga.jpg" to be renamed with a more discriptive name at Image:Aratinga finschi -pet-5b.jpg. Snowman (talk) 09:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Kookaburra image

Image:Kookabura.JPG Image:Kookaburra melb.jpg Hi, can anyone comment on which image is better suited for the infobox for Kookaburra? Thanks! Chensiyuan (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

melb is facing inwards, but the other is a better image... dunno. jimfbleak (talk) 07:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, agree with preceding..they are such a photogenic bird, just a shame they make my dog bark at 5 am after they are kacking around outside (groan) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Help typo Category:Pacific auks "Pacifc auks"

Noob help please. I made a category Pacific auks (to complement the atlantic auk category). Unfortunately I left out the final i. How to I delete the Category:Pacifc auks page? Grantus4504 (talk) 08:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

On;y admins can delete, but I've deleted it for you. Sabine's Sunbird talk 09:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Just for my edification, could Grantus4504 have moved the category to the correct name?--Onorio (talk) 11:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Nope. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Bird IDing

Pretty sure I saw in the Tropical zone, not sure.

Military Macaw and Great Green Macaw look similar, but the Biodome only has the Military Macaw. Search of animals at the Biodomes here. Snowman (talk) 08:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Saw it on the St. Lawrence River

Well, feel free to ID both one just one.

Pie is good (Apple is the best) 17:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

the duck is a Mallard and the shorebird looks like Solitary Sandpiper jimfbleak (talk) 07:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
The tern could be a Common Tern, orange red beak with usually black tip. Short tail streamers. Grantus4504 (talk) 13:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Stiphrornis pyrrholaemus paper

Was apparently out on 15 August. http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/2008/f/zt01850p042.pdf Shyamal (talk) 10:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

White-shouldered fairy-wren

Should White-shouldered fairy-wren be White-shouldered Fairy-wren? Also is the second hyphen necessary, IUCN doesn't use it? Jack (talk) 16:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I've moved it. The hyphen is used in Handbook of the Birds of the World, which is why we use one (we also have storm-petrel, cuckoo-shrike and so on). Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

FA mews

Well, Red-necked Grebe finally crept through FA. Thanks to all those who helped retrieve this after its unexpectedly shaky start (two opposes to one support early on). The input from User:Ling.Nut made me realise the problems for those of us without access to university facilities. Five to go, but I've nothing that I can get through this month, and October includes trips to Scilly and Morocco, so no chance then either. Anyone got an FAC ready to roll - Antbird perhaps? jimfbleak (talk) 06:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

real life has interfered with my plan to nominate it last week. I have been rereading it for a bit, it could use a final pick over from a copyedit point of view and then I can nominate it. Any volunteers? Sabine's Sunbird talk 08:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
I'll try to have a look, my next FAC is not avian...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone give it a look over? I've finished my last pass over and I think its ready. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:32, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Encouraging

Wonder if anybody noticed this on the Avibase site.

2008-03-24: .... In the species section of Avibase, I have also just added a link to Wikipedia to obtain more information on individual species (I am only linking to the English version for now). I will also be working to create another link to the Xeno-canto site, which contains sound recordings of thousands of birds, primarily from South and Central America, but more recently also now Africa and soon from Asia. This should be a great addition to this site.

If a small bunch of editors can make such a difference, there is no telling how much better WP would serve as a review of literature and concepts. There was a discussion on the Taxacom list where User:Dyanega made an interesting defence when someone wrote to him that "Wikipedia was a waste of time". I guess his response may be worth passing on to those interested in birds who have stayed away from contributing here. Shyamal (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Local names

What's the concensus on local names of birds? I've een doing bits on the Sea Birds Preservation Act 1869. The act lists a few regional names for birds Talk:Sea Birds Preservation Act 1869#Local names. Some current species have multiple names and some old names refer to more than one species. What's the best way to link these birds? Grantus4504 (talk) 10:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

If the name is unique you can use a #redirect [[Current Name]], otherwise a disambiguation can be created or if the name is archaic perhaps comments in parenthesis indicating current names may work. Shyamal (talk) 10:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm in favor of including local names in English for birds. People may want to look up a bird that they know only by the name in their dialect. If a species has many common names, we can include them at the end of the article. If more than one species has the same name, we can make dab pages, as Shyamal said. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 15:54, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Merlin on fence.jpg

Could somebody please identify what species of bird this is? The uploader has proposed it for deletion because he was told it's misnamed, as it's not a merlin, but what is it? Apparently some kind of accipiter, but can anybody name the exact species? It looks like a nice photograph that might well be useful if categorised correctly. Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Juvenile Cooper's Hawk? Thin, dark streaks on white breast. Northern Goshawk has buff breast. Sharp-shinned Hawk has coarse borwn streaks. (Sibley) Grantus4504 (talk) 08:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. What would be your recommendation for naming and categorisation if I re-uploaded it to commons, is your identification safe enough to categorise by? Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
The more I look at this, the less sure I am. I'm now favouring the Sharp-shinned Hawk. Size might play a part. The Sharpie at 10-14 inches is closer in body length to a Merlin than a Cooper's 14-20 inches. Grantus4504 (talk) 12:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
The image has been transfered to commons at Image:Accipiter on fence.jpg. Is identification in doubt? Snowman (talk) 09:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Great shot. I agree that it's a Sharpie. Cooper's would have a darker, oranger head (Sibley, also Hawks in Flight by Sutton, Dunne, and Sibley). And the cross-bars on the underpart streaks are what people mean by "coarse" or "dirty" streaks. The immature Coop has "fine" or "noodle-like" streaks—only lengthwise, so its underparts can look white at a distance. You can see this in Sibley's pictures if you look closely. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 15:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
The work on this hawk needs to be completed. If this has now been solved, can the description on commons be modified. Snowman (talk) 09:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Stubble Quail

Is there a protocol to follow when finding an incorrect image on an article? Just removed a pic of a wrongly-named Painted Buttonquail from the Stubble Quail article....have informed the photos owner. Aviceda talk 02:42, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Creator, not owner, right?
I've done just what you did. I'd also add a comment to the description page on Commons.
The photo really should be renamed before taking the next two steps, but somewhat contrary to what I just wrote, I wouldn't try to get it renamed without the creator's permission. If he agrees with you on the ID and requests a move, then once it's done, you can add the new version to Painted Buttonquail and the species article on Commons (or create a species article if there isn't one, if you like). Or maybe the photographer would be willing to do those things. (I did when people corrected my IDs of pictures from Kenya.) On the other hand, the photographer may leave it to you to request the move; there's a procedure for that at Commons.
If the photographer doesn't respond, I've done the above steps with the incorrectly named image.
If the photographer won't agree with you on the ID, you'll probably have to come back here to get more opinions. As I've never seen either an Old World quail or a buttonquail and have no sources on Aussie birds, I won't be helping much.
Let's see whether anyone disagrees with what I said. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 22:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Jerry, it would be a courtesy to approach the creator as a first step. jimfbleak (talk) 06:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Jim and Jerry, have left a message on the photographers talk page, no response yet. Aviceda talk 07:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
I think that it would be best to ask the photographer, but it looks like the photographer is an occasional editor, and so his response might take some time. If the consensus is 100% (I do not know much about these sort of birds) and the photographer does not respond within a week, I think that it would be best to go ahead with the move keeping the photographer up-to-date with a message on their talk page. This involves downloading the biggest resolution original image to your own computer and then re-uploading it with the proper name and description and the original credits. There must be a link on the new file to the original image. The bad name image can then be marked for deletion and an administrator will scrutinize the changes, and, if appropriate, the administrator will delete the bad name file. There are probably other ways to get a bad name file moved. Snowman (talk) 10:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/Archive_22&oldid=1142155200"