Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 52

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45←Archive 50Archive 51Archive 52Archive 53Archive 54Archive 55

Redirect talk page tagging

Ok, I saw someone tagging redirect pages with the {{BirdTalk}} tag. Do we want this? -- Kim van der Linde at venus 14:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

It seems rather useless, but not much of a problem. However, I think they should also add |class=NA—otherwise it just creates a backlog of unassessed pages. Ucucha 14:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Or adding Class=Redirect, makes it even more obvious. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 15:00, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
These can not be dealt with en mass, because quite a lot of them are stubs. I think that the editor is making a useful contribution to tagging pages. However, the stubs need rating. Tagging with Redirect would be useful for the redirects. Snowman (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Some at least of the tags are to the talk page of the redirect page at the scientific name of a bird; these can simply be redirected to the talk page of the main article at the common name. It is a bit of a mess. I really don't think we need project tags on redirect pages. For a start, it uselessly inflates the stats on how many pages the project covers. Maias (talk) 03:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Peregrine Falcon

This mentions a cone in front of the nares as an adaptation for air intake at high speeds. Is there a reliable source for this ? Shyamal (talk) 03:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (93)

Well, I am no petrel expert but the given location and numbers for the time of year would tend to confirm it. Maias (talk) 04:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Agree, nothing to suggest it's not a sooty Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Puffinus griseus -near Avila Beach, California, USA-8a (1).jpg on commons. A total of twelve images of Sooty Shearwaters from the Flickr photo-series uploaded to commons and two shown on the wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 13:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Male Great Argus. Maias (talk) 05:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Argusianus argus -Lok Kawi Wildlife Park, Malaysia -male-8a.jpg on commons and shown on wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 14:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Spotted Catbird. Maias (talk) 04:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Ailuroedus melanotis -Australia-6a.jpg on commons. First photograph of the species on commons and image shown in infobox on wiki species page replacing a painting. Snowman (talk) 14:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Emerald Dove. Maias (talk) 04:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Chalcophaps indica -Australia-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Is it a female? Snowman (talk) 14:28, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
White shoulder-patch says male. Maias (talk) 14:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Added to image description on commons that it is a male. Snowman (talk) 19:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
My photo of Amur Falcon taken in Mongolia. I saw the white underwing coverts when it flew. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 12:34, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Falco amurensis -Mongolia-8.jpg on commons and selected for infobox on species page on the wiki. Are you happy with the image details on commons? Snowman (talk) 13:36, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Aegithalos caudatus -Mongolia -perching-8.jpg on commons. The subspecies details can be added, if anyone is certain of the subspecies. Snowman (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Coereba flaveola -Antigua, Leeward Islands, West Indies-8.jpg on commons. The subspecies details can be added, if anyone is certain of the subspecies. Snowman (talk) 13:57, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
I think Rufous Hornero which I believe is fairly common in Brazil.--Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 15:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Furnarius_rufus_-Brazil-6_(1).jpg on commons with three other photos of the same bird. Snowman (talk) 14:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Java Sparrow Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Padda oryzivora -Paignton Zoo, Devon, England-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 17:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Migratory shorebird resources

For those interested in shorebirds, and in case you were not aware of it, User:Chanakal has drawn my attention to this site from which one can download parts, or the whole, of the 2008 publication “Migratory Shorebirds of the East Asian - Australasian Flyway: Population estimates and internationally important sites”. It covers some 54 species. Maias (talk) 05:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Greenfinch

Greenfinch is currently a dab, but would it be better placed at Greenfinch (disambiguation)? I would guess than most people will be looking for the European Greenfinch, when they search for Greenfinch. Snowman (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

According to Carduelis, "greenfinch" corresponds closely to the subgenus Chloris, so perhaps the dab page can instead be turned into an article on that subgenus. Ucucha 12:04, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems a wee bit eurocentric - even anglocentric - to me. Do we then redirect Goldfinch, Sparrow, Blackbird, Wren etc to the commonest species resident in Western Europe? I would not "guess" that most people searching on "greenfinch" really want European Greenfinch only. Maias (talk) 13:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
To me it seems practical as the other greenfinches are from the far east where English is not the main language. Snowman (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
I am more inclined to go along with Ucucha's suggestion and reserve "Greenfinch" for the Chloris group if and when it is split generically from Carduelis, or if and when someone does an article on the subgenus. It could be expanded from the current dab without much difficulty. Maias (talk) 00:48, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Just for fun...audited content

Right, of our 70 FAs, we have 59 species articles, 2 genera, 4 families, and one class, plus 4 indefinable (nb: counting archaeopteryx as a species)

Of our 51 GAs, 37 species (+ 3 chicken breeds), 2 genera, 1 family, and 7 indefinable.

breaking down roughly by order we have in FAs - 37 Passerines, 7 raptors, 5 parrots, 4 charadriiformes, 2 procellariiformes, 2 penguins, 1 ratite, 1 heron, 1 ibis, 1 duck, 1 pigeon, 1 owl, 1 gruiformes, 1 grebe, and 1 archaeopterygiformes. In GA, we have 25 passerines, 6 raptors, 4 galliformes, 2 procellariiformes, 2 pigeons, 1 parrot, 1 duck, 1 kiwi, and 1 gruiformes. Hmmm.

anyway, if anyone's interested. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Interesting as an index of project progress. If the ideal is to get all taxa articles up to GA or FA, then we have covered close to 1% of the journey so far. Maias (talk) 00:49, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Yippee! Let's crack open a bottle of bubbly then :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I think its perceived as easier and more interesting to do species, than the more important higher taxa, and its not been helped by the Ciconiiformes mishmash. However, there are some clearly defined taxa even at the class level that we should do, such as Columbiformes, Trogoniformes (both could be very pretty too!), and Gaviiformes could easily become an FT. I'm doing Madeiran endemics at present, but if anyone fancies a collaboration at class or family level, I'll chip in if I have a decent book Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been considering a run at FT with the Gaviiformes too, Jim. Wanna collaborate after your Madeiran blitz is done? MeegsC | Talk 13:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes, do you have any views on how to go about it - divide up by species, by section or just take it as it comes? Red-throated just needs a bit of a push to get it to FA, Great Northern Diver and Loon have a fair amount of content, the others need a lot of work. We also need to ensure consistency of layout and style - the capitalised authors in Loon for example need to go, easy enough with wikied. What about getting Red-throated to FA first (we will need three FAs for FT) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The capitalized authors on the Loon page was due to 29 {{aut|xyz}} templates which I have removed with a regex that I wrote for the job. If anyone is interested, the regex on the left side is \{\{aut\|(.*?)\}\}, which captures the authors for addition back on the right side. Incidentally, how would wikied do this? Snowman (talk) 13:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
It would be helpful if there was a navbox for the Columbiformes. Snowman (talk) 16:59, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (92)

Yellow-rumped Marshbird. MeegsC | Talk 01:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Pseudoleistes guirahuro -Uberaba, Minas Gerais, Brazil-8 (1).jpg on commons with the other one in the flickr photoset. Snowman (talk) 09:02, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed. MeegsC | Talk 01:31, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Rhinoceros Hornbill. Maias (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Added to description and recategorised. There are three similar images in commons:Category:Unidentified Bucerotidae. Can you identify them? —innotata 19:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Not easy given the b&w photos and lack of given location. The first pic - File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Een aantal (jonge) mannen houdt verschillende soorten neushoornvogels vast die gereed zijn voor verzending naar dierentuin Artis in Amsterdam TMnr 10006725.jpg - seems to be mostly of young birds not long out of (or possibly hacked out of) the nesting hollow, species uncertain; the 4th bird from the left is possibly a male Plain-pouched Hornbill. The second pic - File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Neushoornvogel (toekang) TMnr 10006571.jpg – seems to me to be of a female Wreathed Hornbill. The third - File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Opperhoutvester C. Brandts Buys met neushoornvogels in een bivak van het Boschwezen Gajolanden TMnr 60023635.jpg – looks like a Rhinoceros Hornbill. It would be nice to get further confirmation. Maias (talk) 01:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I should modify that comment about lack of location; the filename of the third pic suggests that it was taken in Aceh, north-western Sumatra. Maias (talk) 01:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
I've added captions with some of this information. —innotata 20:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Common Diuca-finch; possibly a female, based on the slightly brownish upperparts. Definitely not a Rufous-collared Sparrow! MeegsC | Talk 01:23, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Updated and renamed on Commons to File:Diuca diuca in Los Alerces National Park 1.jpg and File:Diuca diuca in Los Alerces National Park 2.jpg. —innotata 20:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
The shot is over exposed and captive falcons are so often hybrids, it is hard to be sure. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 10:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
My assumption is that hawk hybrids are not as common in zoo birds than in falconer's birds. I am not sure that mild-overexposure here does totally prevent identification. Snowman (talk) 11:54, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
The zoo's website lists the Lanner Falcon as one of the species they keep. Snowman (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I presume this is the same bird. Snowman (talk) 11:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
Sooty Tern. Maias (talk) 03:40, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. Uploaded to File:Onychoprion fuscatus -Rodrigues Island, Indian Ocean -flying-8.jpg on commons. Does its location and/or appearance point to a particular subspecies? Snowman (talk) 09:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Location (Indian Ocean) indicates ssp. nubilosa Sparrman, 1788. (Ref: HBW 3: 661). Maias (talk) 11:39, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
PS: HBW has it in Sterna. Since it has been moved to Onychoprion, I guess it should be nubilosus. Maias (talk) 11:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
Subspecies detail added to image description on commons. Image selected for the species page on the wiki. Snowman (talk) 19:14, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Category:Monotypic bird genera

Following this discussion with a project member... I have no issue with the sensible practice of redirecting genus names to articles on their single species; Allenia properly redirects to Scaly-breasted Thrasher because it would have no independent content. But Allenia is still the genus, and so the redirect should be included in Category:Monotypic bird genera, not the species; "Scaly-breasted Trasher" is not a monotypic bird genus, but rather a species in a monotypic bird genus, so its categorization as a genus is simply incorrect, however practical it might be in some ways. Categorizing the genus redirect is perfectly in line with categorization guidelines, for situations such as this where the article title is not compatible with the category name but the redirect is.

I've been informed that categorizing the redirect is not current project practice, so I'm raising the issue here. I think another appropriate alternative would be to rename Category:Monotypic bird genera to something like Category:Bird species in monotypic genera, which would cure the inaccuracy. postdlf (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Map help requested

I'm working on getting Red Warbler to GA status, and have been asked to add a range map. Can anyone help with this? (I haven't a clue how to do one.) Here's a reasonably good map, and there's also one in Howell & Webb's "A Field Guide to the Birds of Mexico and Northern Central America". Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, MeegsC | Talk 13:58, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I can make one now. What colour would you like the range to be in? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:03, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Do we have a "standard" for resident species? If not, I don't have any real preference... MeegsC | Talk 14:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
The map of mexico was green so I made it dark red (also reminiscent of the warbler's plumage :)) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Cas! MeegsC | Talk 14:32, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
de nada ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:35, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
While we're on the topic of range maps, would anyone be willing to make a range map for the American Kestrel article? I'm in the process of rewriting and citing it, but I'll eventually try to nominate it as a GA. Here's an example; any help would be appreciated. —outoffocus 20:19, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm withdrawing this as I have figured out how to make an (admittedly poor) range map. —outoffocus 23:25, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
A few unsolicited tips, it is a good idea to keep the base map as one single path - use the combine option and not the group to do this. Keeping it a single path, allows you to do union and intersection with your distribution overlay layers. Copy the intersection of the distribution layer and the base for instance, delete the first rough distribution layer, reinstate the base layer and paste back (paste in place) the intersection - that way you can get the holes for lakes, the exact coastlines etc. For the distribution layer itself, a little transparency is good but avoid using the freehand pen, instead prefer a bezier. I tried to improve your map, but the base is problematic as it is made up of too many grouped objects. Will revisit it later. Shyamal (talk) 01:54, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks alot. I'm definitely not a graphic artist, so I was just stumbling through the program trying to figure out the easiest way to do it. Any help you can give is highly appreciated. —outoffocus 02:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Please keep in mind that citing Cornell's Neotropical Birds as the source of a map, as was done for the Red Warbler map, is problematic; especially when linking to a page that does not state anything about the true copyright and does not allow easy access to a page with the acknowledgement. With few exceptions (the Red Warbler isn't one of them), the source of the maps is NatureServe. Their maps, which only differ from Cornell's Neotropical Birds in that they use "normal maps" as a background rather than google maps, cannot be directly linked (they require cookies from the frontpage). The xeno-canto maps for the Americas are also based on NatureServe. • Rabo³ • 08:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
I believe that Cas and most of us have used freely licensed base maps and redrawn the region - which is information / data and any copyright protection would only cover the creativity involved in presentation. However I do understand that map copyrights and legalities can be a bit of mess. Shyamal (talk) 09:03, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Wingspan

Hello, Re descriptions of birds, e.g. 'Waxbill' some of your contributors are not familiar with the concept of 'wingspan' and seem to be stating *wing length* instead of wingspan; as on the Waxbill page. Wingspan is the measurement between the tips of the outstreched wings, as though the bird were in flight. A waxbill's wingspan is about 24cms, not 13 cms. Wing *length* is the measurement from the carpal joint to the tip of the longest primary feather, without the wing being fully extended. This would be about 13cms in a Waxbill.

You can contact me at mail@greg-parrots.co.uk

Cheers! Greg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.248.219 (talk) 13:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a bit more complex. See this and this (first is full text; second has the associated illustration). • Rabo³ • 05:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Once heard an appalling (and hopefully apocryphal) story of two ringers who measured coots and dictated it to a third scribe and at the end of the day the team looked at the measurement and saw a distinct bimodal distribution and decided that there were possibly two populations present. Further examination however showed that two populations separated themselves nicely when grouped by ringer ! (that is, "population A" came from measurements by ringer A and "B from B" !) Shyamal (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

New templates

In the spirit of being bold, I have created two new templates:

  • {{avibase}} which takes an id from Avibase:
{{avibase|D4441CD6E9C993EF|Tetrao tetrix}} gives ""Tetrao tetrix". Avibase."
{{field guide birds of the world|Tetrao tetrix}} gives "Tetrao tetrix in Field Guide: Birds of the World on Flickr"

In the interests of full disclosure, I am an admin of the FBW group but I consider it a valid External Link for bird articles. I have no connection with Avibase but it seems an excellent resource for taxomonic comparisions. I hope these will be useful. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 18:38, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Why is a search of FBW better than a general search of Flickr? Snowman (talk) 21:52, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
I think that the wiki guidelines would say that you should not have added the template for FBW, because of COI. Snowman (talk) 22:24, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
The CoI has been declared, so we can decide if the action was appropriate in the light of the CoI. Personally, I see no problem with Chuunen Baka's initiative. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
re Why is a search of FBW better than a general search of Flickr? FBW is tightly policed for both quality and identification so (IMHO) it produces a better result set. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 08:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Would you provide some statistics and facts about FBW please? Snowman (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
if memory serves it is the invitation only group for images. As such the images would have been checked by the invitor. As such I concurr that it would be a more useful link than just a plain link to flickr search. I would prefer that images were donated to us directly but that isn't realistically going to happen every time, so I have no real issue with the template, if it links to good images of species we have no images of. I see no need on pages we have good images already though. Incidentally I'm in Malaysia at the moment and met a wildlife photographer who is prepared to donate some of his images in a low res form to us. He doesn't have many birds but he does have some critically endanger birds of the Philipines and Cambodia. And for those interested in non birds it sounds like he has some nice shots of things like bats in flight and even a wild Sumatran rhino! Will update when I get back. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I would agree that this template should be used only where it benefits the wiki - where commons does not have good images and good images are shown on FBW; see Wikipedia:NOT#LINK. I also agree that commons should hold creative commons licences of the images where possible - the templates would help to signpost to photographers who we can discuss creative commons licensing. Snowman (talk) 08:47, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Re stats on FBW - there's a summary on the companion web site here - 90k photos covering 66% of the world's species. The group is not invitation only but the images are heavily moderated by the admins. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 09:17, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Rocky Mountain Snipe

Is this a hoax article? Maias (talk) 03:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Definite hoax. I have deleted the article. In case anyone is interested the key text is below: Shyamal (talk) 04:06, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

A Rocky Mountain Snipe is a flightless wading bird of the bird type Snipe in the family Scolopacidae. They are limited in distribution throughout Wyoming and Northern Colorado, but seeing a resurgence in other mountain states and in Western plains of the Dakotas. They are set apart from other snipe variety as they have only two front toes (sometimes giving the bird the name Two Toed Snipe).

Due to the a high predator presence and low population density, these birds are rarely seen and studied and thus a common trophy bird, commonly hunted in the alpine tundra in late summer and spring.

The snipe make up part of the wader family Scolopacidae. The 15 typical snipes in the genus Gallinago are the closest relatives of the woodcocks, whereas the small genera Coenocorypha (the New Zealand snipes) and Lymnocryptes represent earlier divergences in the snipe/woodcock clade[1]

Lives near mountain streams and lakes seeking cover in the low shrubs and trees. It feeds on little insects and during the fall starts a short lived mating season involving a loud turkey-like noise call from the male. The males will work down stream calling loudly for the females and dodges in and out of the brush to scare the female out into the water.

Not much is know about the history of the birds and the evolution of the birds feet from three to two front toes is a mystery but is currently seem as a mutation which consequence.

I've deleted the user's page, which had the same content. I've not blocked the editor, but if we get a pattern of similar spoof articles from different usernames/isps (as with the diet of frogs vandal), it may be appropriate to block at some stage Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:01, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you could delete the duplication of the page from above too, which will reduce the number of times that it pops up in internet searches. Snowman (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Tanzania photos galore

Hi guys, just noticed that Nevit Dilmen has contributed a load of Tanzania bird photos to Commons; generally they still need ID. Don't know if someone has brought this up already. See e.g. Commons:Category:Unidentified Passeriformes. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 22:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I do wonder what this person's motivation is - I mean uploading 12 poor images of the same unidentified bird from the same angle? What's the point? --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 08:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Maybe he or she's hoping one of them will be useful. (Someone else will decide which.) Fortunately, some of them are quite good. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Not willing to allocate the needed brain power to solve the remaining, which for the most part have been moved to Unidentified Ploceidae and Unidentified Nectariniidae. • Rabo³ • 19:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

Why don't we have a barnstar? --Extra 999 (Contact me + contribs) 17:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I actually agree that there should be one. Recently I created a simple barnstar using one of Shyamal's wonderful svg birds, but I never got around to using it and I'm sure other people can do better. —outoffocus 20:56, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
There is a perfectly good tree of life one. We don't tend to award them very often. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:33, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Where do you see a tree of life barnstar? I can't find it on WP:STAR. Anyway, I'm sure people would use it if a nice one was made. What's the harm? —outoffocus 01:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
There are two on my user page - they look like starfish. And there is no harm in making one no doubt, but little point. There are plenty of useful things that need doing, and if done, plenty of barnstars already to recognise that effort. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
There is also the fauna barnstar, which is sometimes given for editing bird articles. I would agree that people would probably use a specific WP Birds barnstar, if one is created. I suppose that there should be different varieties of bird barnstars to denote different areas of excellence. Having said that, I feel that improved content of bird pages alone is adequate reward for many editors of bird pages. Snowman (talk) 12:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
The The Content Creativity Barnstar has two feathers on it and looks nice, while the The Citation Barnstar has a feather on it too....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Verreauxs' Eagle

This bird is currently listed on Wikipedia as Verreaux's Eagle (singular), and identification is credited to Jules Verreaux, early 18th century. It should be spelled Verreauxs' (plural) and credited to the brothers Jules and Edouard Verreaux, 1830. (Roberts Birds of Southern Africa, 7th edition, p 531.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpmouton (talk • contribs) 19:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

IOC list, which we follow, has it in the singular. It may be worth sending an email to them about it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:42, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Seems like most lists have it singular - see avibase --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 11:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Jules seems to have been the more bird oriented brother - see this but it seems like E African journals do use the plural form - http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22Verreauxs%27+Eagle%22&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0 - would be best to check Lesson's original description - (failed to find the description in http://www.archive.org/details/traitdornitholo01lessgoog ) Shyamal (talk) 11:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Found the description here and it seems like the singular form is indeed justified. Shyamal (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Great sleuthing Shyamal! MeegsC | Talk 12:07, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
By the way, the idea that the vernacular name of a species can refer to more than one person with the same last name and end in s' was new to me this year (with the suggestion that Fenwick's Antpitta should have been "Fenwicks' Antipitta"). Normally we say "the Joneses' car", but "Joneses' car" isn't English, right? So even if a species is named after more than one person, I'm not sure it follows that the name should end in s'. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 20:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
fenwickorum suggests that it is indeed named for multiple Fenwick's (otherwise fenwicki), so if the the English name follows that, it should be Fenwicks'. However, the English doesn't have to follow the binomial, so could justify Fenwick's, commemorating only George. I disagree with Jerry; singular words ending with -s add -es to make the plural, so dress/dresses, boss/bosses, Jones/Joneses. A species discovered by John and Mary Jones would be, I think, Joneses' Antbird Jimfbleak - talk to me?
I agree with you on plurals and possessives. My objection is to the lack of a "the". We say "the Joneses' research", not just "Joneses' research", so just "Joneses' Antpitta" sounds ungrammatical to me. (But maybe species names have different rules for articles. After all, I'd say "I saw a Cooper's Hawk," though I'd never say *"I saw a Shakespeare's play.") —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
In text, you would expect "the", but not in a list of names presumably Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Turkey ID

I live in Michigan and I seen a black and white turkey what kind is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.96.232 (talk) 18:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Some kind of domestic turkey, no doubt. See also List of turkey breeds. Maias (talk) 23:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I live in the Northern Rivers of New South Wales on October 10 saw 7 birds that look like Green bee eaters but they have a yellow head. the appear from my not good (it was raining and they were far a away) that they have have the blue underline and black eye line of the Rainbow Bee eater but more green than photos i have looked at, which have blue tail feathers. Just thought i should tell someone.

andreagus@netscape.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.204.7 (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (94)

  • This is a Pallid Swift. Often tricky to separate from Common Swift, but this excellent image shows a large white throat patch, dark mask, pale fringes on the underside of the body, outer primaries darker than inner. Because of the light, can't tell if forehead is genuinely pale, but there's enough without that for definite ID. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Apus pallidus -Greece-8.jpg on commons and selected for the infobox image on the wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 08:46, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Female Superb Fruit Dove. Maias (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Ptilinopus superbus -Taronga Zoo, Sydney, Australia -female-8a.jpg on commons and shown on species page on the wiki. First image of a female on the wiki. Snowman (talk) 08:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Gosh, interesting collection. File:4.Kookherd كوخرد.jpg is Francolinus pondicerianus. I agree on Oenanthe deserti & pleschanka and File:M.d.qi.jpg looks like O isabellina. File:Birds Kookherd. 11 طيور كوخرد.jpg looks like a nice O. (xanthoprymna) chrysopygia. The Streptopelia all look like turtur. The Lanius could be vittatus but I would be happier if it showed a white mirror. File:Birds_Kookherd._2_طيور_كوخرد.jpg is Cercotrichas galactotes. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 19:42, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Regarding Francolinus pondicerianus - Rasmussen & Anderton 2005 has a map with a little text saying "Near endemic" and extending to southern Iran at best (close to the coast), also the populations in the Indian region do not have a strong eye-stripe and I have no other sources to look up. Shyamal (talk) 03:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
PS: Just found that Kookherd is within range for F. pondicerianus Shyamal (talk) 03:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
I've been changing the descriptions wherever a certain ID is claimed. —innotata 14:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Excuse my ignorance, but I can not read the foreign language included in the file names. Do any of these file need renaming? Snowman (talk) 08:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I thought you yourself had no problem with non-Latin alphabets being used on Commons, regardless of readability; presumably it is Arabic, not Farsi, used.—innotata 14:02, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
As far as I understand file formats, commons accepts file names in any language. However, I have no idea if the file names above are correct. Quite often the original file names need correcting according the the identification provided. It seems to me a lot of the files above have the same text with a different number as suffix, but I might have missed something in the foreign text. My question is; "do any of the file names need renaming". Incidentally, it is quite possible that they could be renamed with the correct foreign language text. Nevertheless, I think that the best file names include the binomial name, which is internationally known. Snowman (talk) 17:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
The file links are red, so I presume the files have been renamed. It is up to the editor who requested the identification to do the tidy up work on the files doing renaming and improving the file description where needed, and finally providing an update on the changes here partly for the archives. I expect several people would be interested to see the files, so could the new names of the files be listed here as is usually provided in the update in the birds for identifiable series here. Snowman (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
It has since been determined that the photographs are copyright violations. Shyamal (talk) 04:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Leiothrix lutea --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 09:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. Red-billed Leiothrix uploaded to File:Leiothrix lutea -Chester Zoo, England -two-8a.jpg on commons, and shown on wiki species page. Incidentally, what it the pleural of Red-billed Leiothrix? Snowman (talk) 12:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't hesitate to write "Red-billed Leiothrixes". —JerryFriedman (Talk) 22:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Update: now spelt that way in file description on commons. Snowman (talk) 22:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Leaning towards female Purple-rumped Sunbird Shyamal (talk) 02:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Odd plumage / colours. The region may also have Crimson-backed Sunbird - but the extent of yellow on the underside gives the impression of a male Purple-rumped Sunbird Shyamal (talk) 02:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I've updated the page to say it might be that. —innotata 17:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
No, Lesser Antillean Bullfinch Loxigilla noctis is the species found in the Lesser Antilles. The plumage is fem/imm. Greater has a thick dark bill, and female is dull black Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:13, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. File moved to File:Loxigilla noctis -St Georges, Grenada-8.jpg on commons, without implying corroboration. Snowman (talk) 19:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
very bright, must be male Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Could the bright appearance be due to illumination? Snowman (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I would guess that illumination alone wouldn't account for the brightness, but the sexes are quite similar, and many sites don't specify sex. Probably best to do the same Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:53, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Female. Check brownish mottled crown and buff wing-bars (the latter isn't completely reliable, as some females have as white wing-bars as the males). For comparison this is a male. • Rabo³ • 16:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Update: described as female in image description on commons, and image selected as the infobox image on wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 08:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
A lightly marked light-morph juvenile Broad-winged Hawk, as far as I can tell from Sibley. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 13:47, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I think juvinile Red-winged Parrot. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. That is what I thought. File moved to File:Aprosmictus erythropterus -captive -juvenile-6a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Species counts and family pages

I've been working on keeping List of birds of Florida worthy of its FL status. I'd appreciate it if somebody could come in and add/correct the various numbers per family for "world" and "North American" species counts (and perhaps inline references to the various family blurbs, if needed).

Also, I noticed that some of the new families from the AOU checklist 51st family (ex. Suliformes) are still redlinks. - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 01:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

There are a few other issues.
  • The headings and Toc are fully capitalised, contra MoS, eg should be "Ducks, geese, and swans" not "Ducks, Geese, and Swans" You need to change them in the ToC too, otherwise the links won't work
  • The refs should moved in-line, I don't think putting them all at the end is good practice now
  • I'd add a little bit to the lead, with references, about habitats and types of birds, see List of birds of Thailand
  • one of the "see-also" items is a red link
Hope this helps Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:49, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Are the refs supposed to be in-line when the references apply to the document as a whole? - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 18:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Hoatzin

Hi, I don't know much about birds, but I've just come across Hoatzin and it strikes me as interesting and perhaps worth a good article nomination by someone with an interest. It is currently rated C class but looks at or near GA to me. Rd232 talk 10:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't look close to GA. Nowhere near enough information on what the birds look like and their behaviour (not enough to be of any use to find out a few basic things more), and lots (maybe too much) of a very incomplete discussion of taxonomy. Not very well referenced; needs cleanup. On its way to GA, though, if someone will work on it a bit. —innotata 17:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Happily, if someone wanted to do the work the HBW text is online at [1]. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Feather for identification

Unidentified
Unidentified

This feather was found on a shale talus slope, in the morning, early in October. It was found in the city of Republic area, Northern Ferry County, Washington. The region is a noted flyway area for the state, and in the Okanagan Highlands. The cryptic patterning and size, approximately 16 centimetres (6.3 in), are interesting. Any thoughts as to who may have produced this feather? Thanks. --Kevmin § 23:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I would perhaps think of checking if someone owned guineafowl in the area. Shyamal (talk) 01:43, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I know there are several in the area. O well I was hoping for something more interesting and less exotic. Thanks!--Kevmin § 02:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Actually it is not entirely uninteresting - you might admire it after reading about how that pattern emerges - http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/269/1493/781.full.pdf - and may perhaps be used to make the article on Reaction–diffusion_system a bit attractive Shyamal (talk) 06:52, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (95)

Little Egret. Stork would be big news in Britain! Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Little Egret uploaded to File:Egretta garzetta -Gannel Estuary, Newquay, Cornwall, England-8a.jpg on commons. I am not sure of the difference between a stork and an egret. Incidentally, I think some storks are being reintroduced to England and a few already live in Norfolk, England. Snowman (talk) 13:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
You may be mixing up storks and cranes. There are a handful of Common Cranes breeding in the Norfolk Broads. No storks though, unless they've arrived in the year since I left! MeegsC | Talk 14:07, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I must be confusing bird families/tribes/genera with long legs and pointed beaks. I plan to read the relevant wiki pages soon. Snowman (talk) 14:19, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it was big news: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_yorkshire/3653171.stm -- Kim van der Linde at venus 20:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
That was 2004, and a lot could have happened since then. Snowman (talk) 20:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Bush Stone-curlew. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:30, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Description updated. —innotata 20:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed. MeegsC | Talk 03:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
African Mourning Dove uploaded to File:Streptopelia decipiens -near Baringo Lake, Kenya -adult on nest-8.jpg on commons and shown on wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 10:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Male. • Rabo³ • 18:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Shown on species page. First image of the male on the wiki. Snowman (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Dwarf Cassowary. Maias (talk) 23:20, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Casuarius bennetti -Avilon Zoo, Rodriguez, Rizal, Philippines-8a.jpg on commons and shown on wiki species page. Wiki has paintings, but this is the first photograph of the species on commons. Snowman (talk) 08:16, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
If it is in Sri Lanka it would have to be Jungle Crow Corvus macrorhynchos culminatus. Maias (talk) 23:52, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Corvus macrorhynchos -Sri Lanka-8.jpg on commons without implying corroboration. Anyone that is certain of the subspecies can add this to the image description on commons. Snowman (talk) 11:08, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
These are "Bengal Finches" — a hybrid common in captivity. I'm not sure what the original ancestors were (though mannikins or munias of some sort, based on how they look); they were first bred in Japan centuries ago, according to information available on the web. MeegsC | Talk 03:28, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
First winter female Eurasian Blackbird. MeegsC | Talk 03:22, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Apparently photographed on 1 October 2010, so this is not winter in Germany. Looks like a juvenile to me, and I am not sure at what age males and female juveniles begin to differ. Is there such a term as "first autumn juvenile"? Snowman (talk) 10:54, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
"First winter" is a plumage designation widely used in birding. It means "This plumage is not juvenile plumage (which is the first plumage a bird has after down feathers fall out), as it has begun to moult into adult plumage. However this is not yet a completed process." It's just faster than saying all that!  :) First winter plumage is typically held from any time in September until March. Basically, young birds heading into their first winter of life are "first winter birds". I can tell it's a female because the adult feathers which ARE showing are female feathers (e.g. brown) rather than male feathers (which would be black). By next summer, this year's young will be largely indistinguishable from older adults — with the exception that younger males tend to show brown flight feathers for their first "adult" summer. MeegsC | Talk 13:37, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Presumably, it would be wrong to imply that it has full winter plumage. Would it be better to say that it is starting to form winter plumage and also clarify where on the bird this is happening? Surely its speckled front is its juvenile plumage. Snowman (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Snowman, "first winter plumage" is a mix of juvenile and adult feathers; that's why it's called "first winter plumage" and not just "winter plumage". It would be incorrect to call it juvenile plumage, because some of the feathers are no longer juvenile feathers. If you're uncomfortable calling it "first winter plumage" that's fine, just say "Immature Eurasian Blackbird" and leave it at that. MeegsC | Talk 17:46, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
I believe the preferred term nowadays would be 'first basic' plumage, actually... - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 17:59, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
A little of this "clearer" moulting terminology is explained at Humphrey-Parkes terminology; however, I think that this page might benefit from expansion with some illustrations and examples. If I have understood this wiki page, then this Blackbird would be in the pre-basic moult. I think that the term 'first basic' plumage would not apply to female Blackbirds, because they do not have a sequence of moults to different forms. Presumably, the pre-basic moult (possibly shown here) will transform this blackbird to is "basic plumage". Personally speaking, I have have some difficulty identifying this Blackbirds new brown "female" feathers, but I presume that the comment above is referring to the brown feathers on its sides. I would find "first pre-basic moult" understandable, but I am not sure if this term is used. Snowman (talk) 19:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Okay, lets be clear. "First winter plumage" is what is commonly used in field guides ect. Fist basic ect, nice, but never heard of them yet.-- Kim van der Linde at venus 20:12, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Please take a moment to find out about the "new" terminology and report back. To me the "new" terminology seems better than describing this bird as "first Winter plumage", when it is seen in Autumn and its moult has only just started and the majority of its plumage is still juvenile. Snowman (talk) 20:27, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
Description has been updated. —innotata 20:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
As far as I know, we use what is commonly used, not jargon. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME, yes. But if we used it even when there's a significantly more correct term, the Turkey Vulture would be located at 'Turkey Buzzard'. The basic/alternate plumage is pretty much the standard useage now - particulary since in some species the 'basic' plumage wouldn't be in winter (for instance, ducks in eclipse plumage...) - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 22:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

1st winter and alike are useless in species with more complex molts. That 1st summer really is the 2nd summer in the life of a bird (real 1st summer is juv.) doesn't exactly make it logical either. Not that Humphrey-Parkes is perfect, but it is a step forward. Furthermore, 1st winter and alike are illogical when dealing with species found both north and south of the Equator, especially if migrating between the hemispheres. E.g., seeing a Common Tern in southern Argentina in Dec. (late spring/early summer) and calling it anything "winter". • Rabo³ • 02:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Seems fine to use first winter etc. where it is much more commonly used and makes sense—for most birds from temperate areas. I also don't think "Turkey Buzzard" is more common than "Turkey Vulture"; I'm guessing it's your personal experience (in mine, "vulture" might be the commonly used name). —innotata 14:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, in the southeastern United States, the term "Vulture" is almost unknown, everybody calls them "Buzzards". Which drives me nuts. - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 17:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Band-bellied Owl Natureguy1980 (talk)
Easy mistake to make without location but it's a Brown Wood Owl. • Rabo³ • 02:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Brown Wood Owl uploaded to File:Strix leptogrammica -Taipei Zoo, Taiwan-8a.jpg on commons, with another image of this bird in the same photostream. Snowman (talk) 13:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Some scops owl. Impossible to get the species without voice and natural (non-captive) location. • Rabo³ • 02:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Name woes

Ahead of a Bhutan trip, I looked at Ardea insignis and it is not evident why the author for it is Hume. From what Hume says here it should be attributed to Hodgson. Apparently Stuart Baker considered it a nomen nudum giving the alternate name of Ardea imperialis - and the HBW abstract here rejects that claim and accepts the original name but then it uses Hume as the author rather than Hodgson. What is the explanation - available in HBW perhaps ? Shyamal (talk) 06:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

In the article, the first ref [2] has insignis ... Hodg. (1844) ... descr. nulla ... Hume (1878) descr. princ. which I take to mean Hodg. did not formally describe the bird and Hume first described it. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 14:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, actually the WP article on nomen nudum seems quite explanatory - I am hoping it is correct though. Shyamal (talk) 06:42, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
confirmed - http://iczn.org/content/what-nomen-nudum Shyamal (talk) 06:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Picture query

I would be grateful if someone knows the answer to the following question. Is the picture here by Keulemans in the British Museum Catalogue really of the Bay Thrush (Turdus (or Merula) ulietensis) as per the description, or is it of the Mysterious Starling (Aplonis mavornata)? As I see it, either Keulemans redrew Georg Forster’s watercolour painting of the Bay Thrush (since he had no skin to work from) or he drew it from the skin of the Mysterious Starling (since Sharpe had erroneously conflated the skin with the drawing). Keulemans’ lithograph would be a great illustration for one of those articles, but which one? Maias (talk) 12:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, scratch my second hypothesis; new information suggests the first. Maias (talk) 10:16, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (96)

Confirmed. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
yes it is. definitely. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:22, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Def a capercallie. Which species I can't say. Natureguy1980 (talk) 05:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
What is your list of possible identifications? From the location details on Flickr, I guess it is in the Bavarian Forest, which I think spans Germany, Austria, and Czechoslovakia. Information about this forest appear to me to be better on the German wiki than the English wiki. The photographer is from Czechoslovakia. Snowman (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Then, as Sabine's Sunbird speculated, it's a Western. Natureguy1980 (talk) 15:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Gyrfalcon. Maias (talk) 00:58, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Falco rusticolus -Kamchatka -captive-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Hazel Grouse. Natureguy1980 (talk) 05:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Is it male or female? Snowman (talk) 08:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Gyrfalcon - obviously not the same individual as #965. Maias (talk) 11:10, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

IP changing size of eagles

See this edit on the Golden Eagle and another on Steller's Sea Eagle. What are the correct sizes? Snowman (talk) 13:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

These random size changes should generally be reverted on sight. Lots of people are fascinated by eagles and their size; lots of people don't have a clue how large they really are and numbers that are well beyond the truth are frequent. I've now added ref's, i.e. changes to size without adding a new reliable ref. equals a carte blanche to revert. The Philippine Eagle is another species to keep an eye on. • Rabo³ • 23:50, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
Agree. It's the "Diet of frogs" syndrome. Any changes to measurements, diet etc by an ISP or new user should be reverted on site unless they have a reference. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:48, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I think that the new references for eagle sizes help a lot, otherwise it is old unreferenced details vs new unreferenced details. For eagles from different continents I do not have the necessary books to find a reference quickly. Snowman (talk) 18:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I've just gone through the eagles where size is an issue: Golden Eagle, Philippine Eagle, Harpy Eagle, Martial Eagle, Crowned Eagle, Eastern Imperial Eagle, Wedge-tailed Eagle and Steller's Sea Eagle. These appear to be the main species where size is changed with some frequency, but there may be others (especially in Aquila and Haliaeetus). • Rabo³ • 01:33, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
There are vandals that go around surreptitiously changing numbers to cause mischief too, and this has been remarked upon in other off-wp forums, agree with Jim here. Might be good to prioritise getting some numbers for the eagles referenced. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Would it be possible for IP's number-changing edits to be automatically tagged in the edit summary? This could operate like the repeating characters tag. Snowman (talk) 19:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Collaborations?

Is there ever going to be a new collaboration? As far as I can tell the most recent one was last spring/late winter. What's happened? —focus 23:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

We've lost focus (: Seriously though, Cas is the main instigator of this, and he's been busy in RL, so I guess it's drifted. Finding a topic which pulls in a range of contributors (rather than looking as if it should) is also tricky. Perhaps a global family article like swallow or kinglet. I did wonder about the latter as a FT (Madeira Firecrest is FA, Common Firecrest is at GAN, and I thought of doing Goldcrest next), but there are slightly too many species for me to do it all myself. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:57, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Why not do Resplendent Quetzal? According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Collaboration, that one was winning the poll... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:33, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Or, instead of doing taxon articles, another idea is to more general bird articles - Bird evolution, Bird flight, Bird anatomy, etc. —focus 01:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Resplendent Quetzal is in the lead with five votes. Snowman (talk) 15:28, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Outoffocus, if the collaboration has been a bit 'rusty' (like now), then a species is probably easier to do to get the ball rolling. Big projects are better when there is a momentum happening or one editor really takes up the challenge (actually taking up the challenge is probably true of any FA or GA push). I am still a bit distracted with RL stuff which I really need to sort out for the next few days. Heck, maybe we'll just make it the Quetzal which has been sitting there in the lead for months...it is the first of November after all so as good a time as any. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Update

As it was November 1 and this as a species will be more straightforward than a big'un. I have updated it all in the hope this one gets buffed to GA at least. Anyway I have cleared the deck of expired noms too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Hood Mockingbird

  • It is a great shot of behaviour. Sadly, HBW offers no insight as to what they are digging for. I thought it might be turtle eggs but no dice. The species is actually infamous as a blood drinking species. Sabine's Sunbird talk 08:40, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Are there subspecies in this unified genus? if so, what is its trinomial name for the birds on Espanola? I think I will leave it to others to update the species and genus pages, because I do not have relevant references. Snowman (talk) 22:57, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't know if the Hood Mockingbird might be a subspecies, but Sabine's Sunbird hasn't said so, and I haven't heard of the notion. The matter is that Galapagos mockingbirds should not be separated as a genus Nesomimus, but included in Mimus. —innotata 15:29, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I have just looked it up. The Hood Mocking bird is still a separate monotypic species, but in the Minus genus. Many species of this genus have subspecies, and apparently the Galapagos Mockingbird has 6 subspecies. Snowman (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Correct spelling for Aquila verreauxii

Please could they change the spelling for the English term for Aquila verreauxii. In the article the author spells it Verreaux's eagle when in fact it should be Verreauxs' eagle since the bird is named after the Verreaux brothers and not just one of them and is thus plural. Retard ed69 (talk) 08:59, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

This has been raised before. Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/Archive_52#Verreauxs.27_Eagle. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 09:21, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Bitterns

We have a category Category:Bitterns and a Bittern article and both quite properly talk about the genera Botaurus and Ixobrychus. The Category page includes White-crested Tiger-Heron though, and the bittern article mentions Zigzag Heron. Are either of these two species ever thought of as bitterns? SP-KP (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Bird articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Bird articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

IOC "Pelecaniformes"?

Since when do we use the IOC "Pelecaniformes"? (What about "Coronaves"/"Metaves" then?) Last secondary source is still Cracraft et al. Primary sources pit Hackett et al against Morgan-Richards et al, and IOC is a tertiary source and known to be wrong in some aspects. Altogether, the only thing that can be justified less badly that the rest is perhaps a merger of "Ciconiiformes" and "core Pelecaniformes". But as it seems, no approach is very palatable. What to do? Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 02:07, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Er, I'm kinda lost by your comments. But the AOU uses Pelecaniforms? - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 02:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm happy with what you did with heron, namely putting "disputed" in the Order field of the taxobox instead of "Pelecaniformes", although we could have the various candidates in the taxobox. I'm also happy with the Pelecaniformes article. We clearly need an article on Suliformes/Phalacrocoraciformes (the latter name is currently a redirect to Cormorant), which I don't think should include much but a discussion of the various proposals, like Pelicaniformes.
The problem is that we've built our house on sand, that is, based our taxoboxes and categories on systematics. When people reach a consensus on the least bad solution, I hope they de-emphasize it and focus on uncontroversial taxa as much as possible, until this is resolved in some future century.
Does anyone still believe in Coronaves and Metaves? I suspect your question was rhetorical.
The AOU's NACC currently has the herons in Pelecaniformes with the pelicans and ibises. It also recognizes Suliformes (boobies and gannets, frigatebirds, cormorants, and anhingas), Ciconiiformes (storks), Phaethontiformes (tropicbirds), and Phoenicopteriformes (flamingos). The SACC has a traditional classification except that flamingos are in their own order, but there are proposals pending (here's the main one) to reorganize. I'm sure the check-list committees are just as pleased that the Hammerkop and Shoebill haven't shown up in the Americas. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 16:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought there were problems with Hackett...I guess the best thing is to buff all the historical groupings on each order page. :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Indeed there are problems with Hackett, though not gravely so. Essentially, the strange locus must be removed from the dataset, the analysis must be re-run, and the differences compared. But well, it's a Science paper, and these tend to still go strong when a publication in the Oceanian Journal of General Ignobility would have long been torn to shreds...
If you like the Pelecaniformes article - cool. I basically scraped that together once; the general approach is what I had in mind. Take the old taxa, discuss briefly and put most actual content at family level.
Because there is very little non-systematics-related we can write at present about "Pelecaniformes", "Ciconiiformes"... (I can only point at Timetree of Life's treatment of Falconiformes and grin smugly) most of our informations is books which either have the old order (known to be wrong), or one of the formally proposed (i.e. formally citable) new ones (also known to be wrong). We can write A LOT about taxonomic schemes and schmemes, but blanket statements like "Pelecaniformes have 4 toes webbed" are not correct anymore (in this case, it is wrong either way), so they have no place in the Pelecaniformes article.
OTOH, Phaethontiformes is the classical case which is "good and clean", and we have it and can cite formal schemes that use it even though they may be wrong in other aspects. We can cite the primary literature to point out that the findings of the reviewers are not flawed. (I have unmonotypy'd the order, it now redirects to the relevant section. Maybe this is not good; it depends on whether the prevailing usage will be "Phaethontiformes" or "Phaethontidae" if you only mean crown tropicbirds; I'd guess the latter, in which case the order should probably redirect there until we know how to deal with Prophaethontidae).
We once collected some papers and thoughts regarding the issue. Most are older, but they are from the time up to the point when the race towards a "new taxonomy" (no matter how wrong) began. They are here, enjoy! Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 00:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

News

Common Firecrest is at FAC. I know I keep suggesting collaborative FTs that never come to anything, but kinglets could be a runner. Madeira Firecrest is an FA, Common Firecrest is at FAC, and I plan to do Goldcrest next to complete the Eurasian species. That leaves two American kinglets, and the Taiwan Firecrest, for which I probably don't have good enough sources to do them as a solo effort. Canary island birds are now definitely Goldcrests, so that saves an article. Any thoughts? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I think that it would be worth mentioning that several editors help out when you ask for collaboration. Snowman (talk) 13:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
That wasn't meant as a criticism, it's usually my fault that I run out of steam, start doing something else etc. However, in the case of the kinglets, I have some good books for the three European birds, not much for the two NAm species, and effectively nothing on the Taiwan endemic. It's asking for trouble to do it all from web-based sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I know waxwings are usually quite approachable, but look at this. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

King Vulture

Talk:King Vulture#FAR_removed.2C_pending_discussion_on_talk. Article is in need of major cleanup. Anyone wanna help? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:36, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

If someone has Volume 2: New World Vultures to Guineafowl of Handbook of the Birds of the World, that'd be very helpful for double checking and maybe substituting some book refs for webrefs of King Vulture. Much appreciated. I am trying to check out some other stuff. :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I can see and scan reference copies at two libraries here, but the I probably won't be have time to go to one until next week. —innotata 14:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I'll go on Friday. If you can send me your e-mail address I can send you a scan. —innotata 00:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
done and dusted :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Ornithology book categories on Commons

There has not been many comments on the names of ornithology book categories on commons, and I would welcome opinions on proposed page moves of Category:John Gould:Darwin illustrations. As far as I can see the issue is to name ornithology books on commons at "Author - Book" or "Book - Author", and other ornithology book name format suggestions would be welcome. Comments can go at Category talk:John Gould:Darwin illustrations, or below for uses without a Commons account. Snowman (talk) 10:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I think that I have since found out that the standard for book names is to start the category name with the book name, so I think I have the answer already now. Snowman (talk) 17:09, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

RfC at Template:Automatic taxobox

Taxonomists of the Aves, we've hit a tough decision in constructing the {{automatic taxobox}}'s database. We'd like to hear your opinions regarding the display of Reptilia, Dinosauria, Saurischia, and Theropoda above Aves in all bird taxoboxes and the inclusion of Avialae in the classification. Please respond at Template talk:Automatic taxobox#Attention members of WP:BIRDS. Thanks! Bob the Wikipedian (talk • contribs) 19:31, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (97)

Confirm adult Sedge Warbler Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The small bill with undeveloped casque and down on the neck suggest younger bird to me. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:53, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
The under-developed casque indicates that it is not an adult male, and it does not have the beak colouration of the adult female. I presume that it is a juvenile as well. Snowman (talk) 22:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
I think this is a Golden Eagle Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Most definitely not a Golden Eagle, but I couldn't tell you what. If it truly is a hawk from Spain, it will probably turn out to be a Eurasian Buzzard. Natureguy1980 (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
The photographer tagged it "águila de Harris", and it looks like juv. Harris's Hawk. • Rabo³ • 13:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
That makes sense. Yes, it does look like one. Still, I'm leery of using falconers' birds in articles unless an ID is 100% certain, as there is much hybridization among them. Natureguy1980 (talk) 19:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Appears to me to be not a hawk, but rather, a caracara. A Striated Caracara in particular. Natureguy1980 (talk) 21:07, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Phalcoboenus australis -London Zoo, England -eating-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 21:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
From the length of the tail it looks like Long-tailed Myna to me (rather than Yellow-faced). Maias (talk) 10:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
PS: However, I note that the website of the Edward Youde Aviary says they have Yellow-faced Myna, so I guess it must be that species. Maias (talk) 10:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Now described as a Yellow-faced Myna on commons, as listed on aviary website. More opinions welcome. Snowman (talk) 23:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Swan/Chinese Geese: introduced, or simply feral. —innotata 21:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Family of Chinese geese uploaded to File:Chinese goose -Staglands Wildlife Reserve, Wellington, New Zealand -family-8.jpg on commons. They are at a visitor attraction, so I think they are kept in the grounds. Shown on goose breed page. Does it have a binomial name? Snowman (talk) 22:00, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
The Swan Goose is Anser cygnoides; the Chinese goose is the domesticated form or a variety therof—the English names are a bit interchangeable. —innotata 22:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
The ones in the photo are obviously pretty domestic in addition to the things on the circumstances, with their body shape. —innotata 22:13, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Incidentally, the Category:Domesticated geese category on Commons looks like it is in a bit of a mess. Some commons editors do valuable work sorting images into categories, and I have noticed editors sorting out hundreds of bus photographs, putting them in multiple categories by make, by year, by country, and so on. Is sorting out the domesticated geese Category on commons a high priority with anyone? Snowman (talk) 14:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Ja; I hope somebody who knows about breeds can put some serious effort in the categories. Perhaps some things to do right now would be making categories for the cygnoides breeds, —innotata 00:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Location indicates either Little Raven (most likely) or Australian Raven (possible). Lack of obvious throat hackles reinforces probability of Little Raven. Maias (talk) 05:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Corvus mellori -Edithvale Wetland, Melbourne, Australia-8.jpg on commons. How did you exclude Forest Raven or Little Crow? Snowman (talk) 08:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Neither species occurs at the stated location. Maias (talk) 11:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification - 1000 images - any feedback?

The "birds for identification" series is nearing 1000 listings, and totals over 1000 with 90 more birds from the "parrots for identification" series that ran in-parallel during the early series. Accurate identifications have enabled many bird photographs from all over the world to be shown on the Wikipedia or to be uploaded to Commons. All the many contributions and erudite opinions provided by numerous editors are appreciated. Does anyone have any suggestions for improvements with the collaborative process or listings? Snowman (talk) 13:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

My impression was it has been running along quite nicely. Ferreting out images is much appreciated by us all I am sure :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I have two comments, although you have already heard one before, about how it is unnecessary to list images from people like Dario Sanches who have solid records of identifying birds already. The second suggestion is that we should have a subpage for images that we haven't been able to ID. We can then throw that image at other groups of birders to see if they can help - for example I now write for 10,000 Birds, so I could have a posting to that affect as a kind of quiz. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

  • Dario's images that have been uploaded recently have only been listed for identification to determine if the bird is male, female, or juvenile. This is to complement the details already give in the Flickr captions. Snowman (talk) 13:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I have brought an occasional image back from the archives for a second discussion, and I have been thinking about bringing good quality unidentified images back from the archives in a "Birds for identification again" series. Snowman (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Of course, anything copied from the wiki to other websites will need to be according to the appropriate copyright licence and the appropriate attribution provided where necessary. Snowman (talk) 13:35, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

List of birds of Canada and the United States

Resolved
 – Good work, in particular by Snowmanradio, Maias and Jimfbleak, thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello WikiProject Birds. The above list has been identified at WP:FLC as being "at risk" of delisting. This basically means that it's still in a reasonably good shape, but that it needs updating in line with current featured list standards. If the list is not improved, then it will be nominated at WP:FLRC. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Fixes here should include (as a minimum):

  • Captions re:MOS (i.e. periods only used for complete sentences).
  • Avoid bold links throughout.
  • Fix dead links.
  • Don't start with "This list of birds..."
  • Reference titles should not be all caps.
I've fixed that one Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:40, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Also:

  • Avoid linking in headings per WP:HEAD.
  • Correct the capitalisations (such as northern hemisphere)
  • Fix dab link.
  • Don't mix date formats in the refs.

Just a quick heads-up, if these aren't fixed by the end of the weekend, this list will be subject to WP:FLRC. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:50, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

If nobody else has/does, I'll try to get all these issues fixed tomorrow morning. - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 18:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (98)

Confirm. Maias (talk) 01:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Sorry - actually now split as Australasian Pipit (still often called Richard's in Australia). Maias (talk) 01:32, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you: File moved to File:Anthus novaeseelandiae -Merimbula, New South Wales, Australia-8.jpg. Snowman (talk) 12:31, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Confirm - roosting flock of Bar-tailed Godwit with a couple of Red Knot in front. Maias (talk) 01:28, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
No doubt. Shyamal (talk) 16:52, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Shown in infobox on wiki species page. If you make a list below of URLs to the required images with identifications, then I would ask the Flickr photographer. Snowman (talk) 11:29, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Agree, Jungle Myna southern population (with blue iris) Shyamal (talk) 01:41, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Lappet-faced Vultures (the big dark ones with pinkish heads), young Rüppell's Vultures (those with the scaly fringes on the mantle feathers) and White-backed Vultures (the pale ones on the left). MeegsC | Talk 03:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Page description has been updated. —innotata 16:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
That file was a duplicate of File:Adjutant Stork.jpg, identified as a Lesser Adjutant by Ltshears. —innotata 14:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I am beginning to think that the Amazon parrots are the nominate of the Mealy Amazon, and that the variability seen is due to the well described variation in yellow and green on the head of this subspecies; however, Yellow-crowned Amazons can look similar. I am puzzled because what Forshaw lists as Dusky-headed Conures have pale-yellow irises in his 2006 book and what look like Aratinga at the clay lick have pale-blue irises. Other Aratinga weddellii images on Flickr have pale-blue irises. Have I missed something? Snowman (talk) 14:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Blue-headed Parrot, Mealy Amazon and Dusky-headed Parakeet. Nothing else. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 15:37, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Both Mealy and Yellow-crowned Amazon on that photo. The irides of wild Dusky-headed Parakeet appear white, or at least near-white, in typical light conditions. I suspect the claims of pale yellow (or for that matter pale blue) depends mainly on the light (or when judging based on photos, screen settings). • Rabo³ • 20:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
I think five Mealy and three Yellow-crowned Amazons. Snowman (talk) 21:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
No, that's an African Green Pigeon. • Rabo³ • 20:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
African Green Pigeon moved to File:Treron calvus -at a zoo in Tanzania -upper body-8.jpg. Is it male or female? Snowman (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
White-banded Swallows. (For future reference, swifts can't perch like this; they can only cling to vertical surfaces, like cliff walls, and the inside of chimneys and tree trunks, because all their toes point in the same direction.) MeegsC | Talk 19:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. Moved to File:Atticora fasciata -Rio Tiputini, Yasuni National Park, Ecuador-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 21:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Move requested to IOC name

Administrator assistance requested to move Grey-fronted Green Pigeon to Sri Lanka Green Pigeon. It was at Pompadour Green Pigeon, but I moved it to Grey-fronted Green Pigeon, some sort of split of species with a different binomial in error. Snowman (talk) 12:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

This is much more complex. First we need to determine if we are splitting it. Pompadour Green Pigeon is the name for the non-split. When split, Sri Lanka Green Pigeon is not the same as the Grey-fronted Green Pigeon, and these are just two of the species that are required if split:
  • Sri Lanka Green Pigeon (T. pompadora) from Sri Lanka. Monotypic.
  • Andaman Green Pigeon (T. chloropterus) from the Andamans and Nicobars. Monotypic.
  • Grey-fronted Green Pigeon (T. affinis) from the Western Ghats in India. Monotypic.
  • Ashy-headed Green Pigeon (T. phayrei) from N. India, Nepal, east to Yunnan in China, and south through Indochina (N. of the Isthmus of Kra). Monotypic.
  • Buru Green Pigeon (T. aromaticus) from Buru and nearby smaller islands. Monotypic.
  • Philippine Green Pigeon (T. axillaris) from the Philippines. Incl. subspecies amadoni, canescens and everetti.
If split, the name Pompadour Green Pigeon is not in use (should be disambiguation), and we'll need pages for all of the above. If maintained as a single species, only the name Pompadour Green Pigeon is in use, but I'd suggest redirecting the other names to the article and perhaps copying the above list into a basic taxonomic section ("Sometimes split into six species: [the above list]"). I'll leave the judgement of this to others, however. • Rabo³ • 21:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Page name moved back to "Pompadour Green Pigeon". Snowman (talk) 22:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Several editors have updated and expanded the "Pompadour Green Pigeon" article. Snowman (talk) 12:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

New IOC list

Version 2.6 of the IOC list is available at the usual address. I haven't looked at it except for my favorite, Fenwick's Antpitta. The IOC is perhaps prudently waiting for the SACC on that one. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 16:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ooh goody, it's like looking at the New Year's Honours List or something :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:06, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Aha, Ground Parrot is a split. This has been discussed for some time - an anticipated paper. I guess a few of us can read, digest and comment. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
  • It has certainly been discussed as a split for several months by those who knew about it. I'd be keen to hear what folks like dysmorodrepanis and others think about it. What is interesting upon reading some of my australian parrot books while trying to source info on the western taxon is how almost perfunctory the information was, it appeared to be glossed over a bit in Lendon and my 1978 Forshaw (PoTW, note that I haven't read the Parrots of Australia bit on WGP which might have more detail.) My imression is that IOC errs on the conservative side, so the split may be sound. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • My impression is the IOC find names where there is a suggestion for a split, presumably to have all the new common English names covered. I think that the IOC are well known for this, so with this in mind, I wonder if you will have to modify your thoughts on the Ground Parrot split. I have not read much about the new evidence for a taxonomy split, but I would like to know if the new way of classifying the Ground Parrot has been widely accepted or not. Forshawe (2006) describes them as two slightly differentiated subspecies, so I am quite surprised that the wiki has already gone ahead and split the Ground Parrot article. At the present time, I am not sure if this is a controversial split or not; however, if it is, perhaps we should rely on secondary sources for controversial splits, which would be in line with wiki guidelines on sources. Perhaps erudite editors will comment soon. Snowman (talk) 12:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
This split is well supported by the evidence in the article. In recent years. more and more cryptic species have been recognized, explaining Forshaw's observations. The subspecies assignment has been doubted already for a long time, and this article confirms what was already known. The genetic distance between the two species escpecially compared to the genetic variation within each species is very obvious supporting a split. The two species diverged two million years ago from each other, many species are far less diverged and less old. So, the authors suggestion that these should be seen as two species is solidly supported by the evidence. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 15:28, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Many suggested splits are not recognized by the IOC, so many English names are not covered. However, at species level, IOC is by far the most split-willing worldwide checklist. They've taken over from Clements, which used to be the most split-willing. Howard and Moore is far more conservative in their treatments and for a list with worldwide coverage, it has generally been the preferred list by pro biologists because of their relatively extensive documentation. However, it hasn't been updated for a long time. They're currently preparing a new edition and it'll be interesting to see it in full when it's out. **These are just general observations. I have not looked into the papers arguing for the western and eastern g. parrot split and do not know if it is reasonable.** • Rabo³ • 20:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

History of ornithology

I'm wondering if there's a reason why there isn't a History of ornithology article, as there are for other fields (e.g. history of paleontology and history of botany). I was thinking of working on one, but I want to make sure there isn't some sort of consensus against it. Thanks. —focus 01:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I can't see how there'd be a problem with it; I think it would be very hard to create a very good article on the subject, though! —innotata 02:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I think a History of ornithology article would be very worthwhile, and a high importance article for the project. I agree with Innotata that doing it justice would take a lot of hard work, but I support the idea and would try to help out, at least in a small way, where I could. I note that User:Notafly has put a lot of effort recently into Timeline of ornithology, to which one would hope a history article would be complementary. Maias (talk) 03:52, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I think that the timeline of ornithology article is interesting, and a "History of ornithology" would be an important article. Advances in science, especially biology, have had a considerable impact; such as, advances in genetics, the theory of evolution, and DNA analysis. I think that it would be quite difficult to write an article with such a wide scope, but that should not stop someone making a start and others helping. Snowman (talk) 12:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Just to get a page up, I've created a stub here. I realize that it barely has any content, but hopefully that will change quickly. —focus 16:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't think I'll work much on the page right now, but I have the New Naturalist History of Ornithology, if you want me to find anything. It mostly covers just British ornithological history but would probably be useful for general history—and British ornithology is a big part of world ornithological history. I'd suggest getting at some general books on the subject, like the (shorter) A Concise History of Ornithology by Michael Walters. —innotata 00:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Cochoa (talk · contribs), in this case. Although he/she has made a handful of other edits, he/she seems to be mostly concerned with going through and adding an external link to orientalbirdimages.org.

What do you think? Is this a useful external link, or should these be removed? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Oriental Bird Images is a better external link than most such in my opinion, though if we have good images, why bother doing much linking to other websites? And this sort of single purpose for an account is not encouraged; I'd suggest again leaving a polite notice. —innotata 01:36, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

See User Athen66 contributions. I am requesting comments and opinions about these external links in order to determine a consensus about them? Do wiki pages of fairly common species need external links to this website or will the often numerous photographs on commons suffice? I have notified the user on his talk page about this discussion. Snowman (talk) 22:16, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Obviously this is somewhat promotional; the links seem excessive enough on most pages and, usually, other users have thought links to photo websites shouldn't usually be given for common species, or if so only to pretty major websites, like ARKive. —innotata 22:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Some of these are fine. Kerguelen Petrel links to images for a species we don't have images for, for example. Someone should have a polite word with Athen about it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
Update: No reply to polite notice. I have looked at all the pages. I have deleting some of the links and kept quite a lot. Snowman (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

chickens are not birds!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As far as my knowlege as a cockologest (person who studies poultry)gose poltry is its own catagory known as fowls. One way to tell if it is a fowl or bird is if it has a comb ( the red flap on the top of the chickens head. Another is way is like I mentond erler most fowls are poltry. As a conclusion birds and fowls are diffrent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.227.95 (talk) 02:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Er...say what now? And "Fowl" are indeed birds. - The Bushranger Return fireFlank speed 02:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah, that was the laugh I needed this morning. Natureguy1980 (talk) 16:10, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Bird is to chickens, as mammal is to sheep. Snowman (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Calender

I am thinking out making a calender using suitable bird photographs that are available to the wiki, with each month having a photograph taken in that month, if possible. It is only an idea at the moment. I could upload it to a sub-page so it can be downloaded and printed out if needed. I am not sure about how the images will be selected or about using pdf, html, or wiki code. It could be similar to downloading wikibooks, but I have no idea how wiki books are make. Is this outside of the scope of the wiki? Comments welcome. Snowman (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Interesting idea, and I would have thought within the scope of the project, but wikibooks says As a general rule only instructional books are suitable for inclusion., so that may not be the way to go Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

tie-breakers needed....

on the collaboration before December :) . Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Still a tie :( Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:42, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
All done and dusted - White Stork it is...Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
I've found a few parasites that I'll add later Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Flamecrest

I'm thinking of working my way towards a Regulus FT (two through FA, one at FAC), but I've reached a stumbling block with Taiwan Firecrest. None of my books have anything, and apart from a bit of taxonomy I can't find anything RS on the web even to confirm what's already there. Anything you can point me towards or email me (HBW?) will be gratefully received. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

ISBN 9780198549406 probably has something, and so does the HBW. Ucucha 15:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
HBEW does have info but it is pretty light. Not many references listed either. Sabine's Sunbird talk 18:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to Uchuca, Shyamal and Sabines. I think this might have to go to the back of the queue, and wait until the 2012 East Asia book comes out, there's just not enough at present Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:02, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Peer Review...

....is up for American Kestrel at Wikipedia:Peer review/American Kestrel/archive1 Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:54, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for putting a notice here; all comments are appreciated. —focus 20:45, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (99)

I think Geranoaetus melanoleucus but not a very good angle. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 10:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought it was a good view of the stripes on the feathers that might accompany more conventional photographs. Snowman (talk) 10:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Soa Paulo Zoo do have one male Black-chested Buzzard-eagle; see ISIS. Uploaded to File:Geranoaetus melanoleucus -Sao Paulo Zoo, Brasil-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
As described, juv male Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Wow- definitely adult male Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:37, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, adult summer male Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:40, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Details added and shown in infobox in wiki species page. First male of its species in summer plumage on commons. Snowman (talk) 11:48, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Blue-breasted Kingfisher Halcyon malimbica Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Details updated and moved to File:Halcyon malimbica -The Gambia-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Village Weaver Ploceus cucullatus male in non-breeding plumage Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Ploceus cucullatus -The Gambia -male-8.jpg on commons. Shown in gallery on species page. Snowman (talk) 16:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Female Red-cheeked Cordon-bleu Uraeginthus bengalus Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Uraeginthus bengalus -The Gambia -female-8.jpg on commons. Without red cheeks I presume that it is a female. Shown in gallery on species page. Snowman (talk) 15:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Yellow-faced Parrots

Re: File:Poicephalus flavifrons -Ethiopia-6.jpg

They look like the all-yellow-faced subspecies of Yellow-faced Parrot, rather than those with an orange tinge in the yellow. It is nice to see the juvenile as well. It would be nice to match up the subspecies with the location of this species. Snowman (talk) 16:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
The parrots were on an island in Lake Tana if that helps. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 17:14, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
That is where the nominate is. Adults have all-yellow-faces as seen in the photograph. Image description updated. Off course, I did not mean that the exact location of rare birds should be divulged. Snowman (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Yellow-faced Parrot expanded, but not enough for a DYK? Snowman (talk) 21:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I think we're getting mixed up with Yellow-fronted Parrot. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 12:55, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Most major authorities considers the Yellow-fronted Parrot as monotypic. Using zoonomen as an authority of diagnosability of subspecies (i.e., can be recognized; cf. Identification (biology)) is misunderstanding what zoonomen is about. Zoonomen is about the validity of scientific names (their correct spelling, if they were described following ICZN protocols, description authority, etc), i.e. if the names are available at all. When subspecies lists are included in wiki articles the best would be both zoonomen and an authority dealing with diagnosability. Furthermore, in this case zoonomen follows the majority and considers the Yellow-fronted Parrot as monotypic. The two subspecies currently listed under Poicephalus flavifrons are actually for Poicephalus fuscicollis (the on wiki awfully named Un-cape Parrot, which should be renamed [even if we continue using that highly questionable name, Cape should be in caps as after Cape of Good Hope. IOC name is the far better Brown-necked Parrot], or merged with Cape Parrot, which for a large part already includes info+photo for the "Un-cape Parrot" [needs to be rewritten, at least in part, if we continue to recognize both spp]). If following the minority and recognizing two subspecies of the Yellow-fronted Parrot they are nominate + P. f. aurantiiceps. • Rabo³ • 14:12, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Updated. • Rabo³ • 14:29, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I accidentally got some names wrong. zoonomen is on the Main WP bird page and its use could be made clearer there. Snowman (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I realise that the Cape Parrot and the "Un-cape Parrot" articles are in a bit of a mess. I found it very difficult to find out useful stuff on the internet to do the tidy-up work. Snowman (talk) 19:36, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I made a bit of a lame hook at DYK - now to expand the Yellow-faced Parrot as well and it can be a double one. There is a lot of info on hte latter but it is morning here and I will be busy for the next few hours. Anyone is welcome to expand to make a double hook. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:38, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Name a country!

There's a discussion Talk:The_Gambia#RfC:_The_Gambia_or_the_Gambia, the third of its kind, relevant here because the associated List of birds of The Gambia is affected Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:56, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (100)

White-crested Turaco Tauraco leucolophus; and our 1000th bird is pretty Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:56, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Just noticed it is all rights reserved, so not uploaded. It is a milestone, but I think of it as the 1090th, because there were 90 in the "Parrots for identification" series that ran parallel with "Birds for identification" before the two series were unified. Snowman (talk) 12:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
NIce bird. Should be a nice pic for A 5x expand/DYK...Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
White Wagtail ssp alba Judging by the yellow face and black bib, I'd guess a first winter male Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Motacilla alba -Andalusia, Spain-8.jpg on commons without implying corroboration. I have not found out anything about this species having a yellow face. Snowman (talk) 18:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
At the time, it was OR, but the photos at the end of this show yellow in several cases, even though it's burned out a bit by the overlighting Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
There's another set of in-the-hand photos (taken in Spain) here. They confirm the yellow on first-winter birds— both male and female, though much more pronounced on males—but, even allowing for lighting effects, they don't look as "clean" as the unknown bird. Jimmy Pitt talk 10:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
On plumage, it's obviously alba, the only plausible ssp in Andalusia anyway. I certainly can't recall seeing such a strikingly yellow-faced bird; I was going to suggest that it was a local variant, but Jimmy's Spanish pdf scotches that theory Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
The camera metadata includes an "Adobe Photoshop CS4" entry. It does not say what image modifications were make, but it might explain the extent of yellow. Snowman (talk) 12:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if it was feeding on insects in flowers. I've seen golden-crowned House Sparrows here in New Zealand after they were feeding in flax. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Looks more like an African Pied Wagtail to me. If no one is sure, I can try to check later. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 19:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. That would explain it. File moved to File:Motacilla aguimp -Kilifi, Kenya-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 20:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Based on location and appearance I will tentatively agree. No other wheatear looks like this in Ethiopia. The HBW doesn't have a subspecies image of this race (lugbris) and the image above doesn't exactly match the description, but the species is prone to huge amounts of variation. No indication that this race has any sexual dichromisim, so sex undetermined.Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
This is my photo. How do you guys pick up on these so quickly? My preferred id is Oenanthe lugens lugubris but in Birds of the Horn of Africa (Redman et al) it is the nominate Oenanthe lugubris lugubris which confusingly also has a light-bellied form. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 10:58, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Before I listed this bird here, I found an internet search confused between Lenanthe lugubris and Lenanthe lugens. Does the image description need changing? How has the suggested split been received? Your photography is appreciated. Have you got any more pictures of the Yellow-fronted Parrots? Incidentally, may I say that it might sometimes be helpful to identify subspecies (either now or in the future), if you gave more precise location details. Snowman (talk) 13:50, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think the lugubris split is generally accepted - I'm no expert but compare: "O lugubris". Avibase.. Sorry about the parrots - I wouldn't normally post a shot that bad - poor light, wrong camera - but that's the best I have. As for locations, country is usually enough for most subspecies but you can always ask for more info if there's any ambiguity. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 15:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Green Heron. MeegsC | Talk 00:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Butorides virescens -Houston Zoo, Texas, United States-8a.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 01:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
FWIW, probably a wild bird that's flown into the enclosure, since it's a common species and improbale to actually keep in with apes Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Details added to image description. Snowman (talk) 20:53, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Confirm Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Black Swan (Cygnus atratus) -- ornamental, escape or feral? Jimmy Pitt talk 11:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Since it's in a park, most likely ornamental, but can't be sure Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:47, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
What exactly is an Ornamental bird? which is a red wikilink at present. Does its brown neck, dull beak, and grey-tipped black feathers on its back indicate that is is a juvenile or something? Snowman (talk) 19:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Cygnus atratus -Cismigiu Gardens, Bucharest, Romania -swimming-8a.jpg. Snowman (talk) 19:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (101)

Shown on species page. Snowman (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed. A female as stated (or the photographer has the same book I have). Quite a shot. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:41, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The flickr photographer says that it is a young male in the writing below the image. Snowman (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
That'll teach me not to post late at night. You should believe the photographer—he probably has a better book than I do. (Zimmerman, Turner, and Peterson doesn't say anything about young birds.) —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Poor photo of a Black Kite --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 10:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Uploaded to File:Milvus migrans -India -flying-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 10:53, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
If your last possibility is right, and it looks reasonable to me, this could be the long-sought illustration for urohidrosis. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:28, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Before coming to that conclusion I would like to know if the whitish colour on the legs occurs in juveniles, sub-adults, or non-breeding birds. In long grass like that the guano on legs could also protect against biting insects and deter small biting animals. Snowman (talk) 18:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The legs of subadult White Storks are a duller, browner red. This is an adult or very near adult bird with a red bill and bright red legs above the white. The white is too bright to be mud or similar, I think it has to be guano Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:20, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Update: shown on "Urohidrosis" and "White Stork" articles. Snowman (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
How certain does its location in Kenya indicate the subspecies? Snowman (talk) 17:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
It is probably nearly 100 percent certain it's ciconia, though only measurements can truly distinguish them. The ciconia subspecies is known to occasionally turn up in India (the primary wintering grounds for asiatica) in the non-breeding season, but I haven't yet read anything about asiatica going to Africa. MeegsC | Talk 17:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Agree, I can't find any suggestion that asiaticus has occurred in Africa, so have to assume it's nominate Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:08, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Update: nominate added to file details. Snowman (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Captions for photographs

Referring to Wikipedia:Captions#Tips_for_describing_pictures one of the tips for describing photographs is listed as "Where was it taken?" and it is stated there (at the top of the linked section) that the list of tips are details that people might want to know about a photograph. Should we be giving the location (if known) of bird photographs much more often in captions? Snowman (talk) 13:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I'd say it depends. The location is always available on the file's page, so interested people can always check there. It's probably at least as important (if not more so) to get across information that isn't available on that file page. Far more enlightening would be tying it in to the article somehow, so that people browsing the captions are interested enough to read the article to find out more. If location is important because it identifies (i.e. with absolute certainty) a subspecies why not name the subspecies instead of the location? There are obviously exceptions. If the location is important because it is a vital wintering area, or a key migration point, or the only remaining location where the species is found or the location of the only known nest or something like that, then location is certainly worth mentioning in the caption. To me, saying only something like "Flying in Hungary" or "Standing in the Humber River" is pretty much pointless. MeegsC | Talk 15:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
The guideline appears to me to be giving the tip that the location of photographs should feature in the image caption of the wiki article. It most cases this would entail copying the location from the file description on commons and writing it in the caption on the wiki. The location answers many questions and "Standing a river" does indicate that is is fresh water and not seawater or brackish water. "Flying in Hungary" is a bit vague in its own right, it would be better to say "An adult wild bird flying in Hungary" - still keeping the location in the caption. Snowman (talk) 17:43, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Snowman, that's a suggestion, not a guideline. It also says you can say when and why the photo was taken! Are you suggesting we put those details into all captions too? Per the whole guideline (Wikipedia:CAPTIONS), captions should be short and sweet. Everything in a caption should impart information that either draws people into the article or summarizes key things that a browsing reader can take away with them. MeegsC | Talk 17:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I am suggesting that guidelines are followed sensibly. Incidentally, I usually put the dates in captions of buildings and people; however, the date is usually not so important for bird images. Why a photograph was taken is often more elusive. Snowman (talk) 18:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I tend to agree with Meegs, put the location in when it helps confirm eg claimed ssp, otherwise it's not necessarily adding much, and it's on the image file. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
That will apply to any image of any polymorphic bird species, any migrating bird, and so on. I find it difficult to think of any circumstances when the location is not important to a sizeable proportion of interested readers. The file details on commons would not be readily available in printed out FT books, where the captions in wiki articles are likely to be the only text available directly about the image. Snowman (talk) 13:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Pages protected from page moves indef

A number of pages have been protected against page moves indefinitely; see this example. I think that this goes against the the wiki spirit that anyone can edit pages and that would include move pages. The protection does not seem to be subsequent to any page-move vandalism that I am aware of. I have asked the editor to reply here. Other comments welcome. Snowman (talk) 10:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

No history of move-vandalism as you say. This seems to be part of a decision (taken where?) to move-protect all FAs. I'm quite happy to unprotect any article that isn't subject to vandalism or edit-warring, but perhaps we should wait to see if the protecting editor gives a satisfactory reply. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The edit was made by User:Tbhotch and from his comment responding to another user's question about the same thing, all he did was add the page move protect template to pages that were already protected indefinitely from page moves. So nothing was changed, just that the page-protection was made more noticable. If you look at the protection log for the page, you should see that it was protected in the past. Ravensfire (talk) 16:38, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Raven for you reply, but also guys I'm not an admin and I cannot protect pages, and the addition of the template won't protect them. Tbh®tchTalk © Happy Holidays 03:29, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining your edits, and also for highlighting that these pages are move-protected, if that is the case. Incidentally, the short edit summary "{{pp-move}}" was provided and because of this I had assumed that this marked the start of page-move protection. Snowman (talk) 10:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Page move

Administrator assistance requested to move Southern Ground-hornbill to Southern Ground Hornbill its IOC name. Snowman (talk) 00:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Ucucha 00:14, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Goldcrest FAC

Goldcrest has been languishing at its FAC for 24 days. It's had a lot of input from Snowman, and Cas has also reviewed, but that's all so far. I don't mind an article being failed because it's rubbish, but I'd hate this to go simply through lack of reviews. Any input welcome. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Birds for identification (102)

Not very easy to tell apart from the House Sparrow, but fits very well: slightly streaked belly, very large bill. —innotata 18:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree, females are difficult to separate from House Sparrow, but nothing obvious to suggest that the photographer has got it wrong (and given the gregarious nature of sparrows, there could well have been males around that we can't see) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Looks like it has been severely wing clipped. If feral, it would probably try its best to hop-up trees going from branch to branch to escape cats. Perhaps it is a pet or a recently escaped wing clipped pet. Snowman (talk) 10:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
White-naped Crane moved to File:Grus vipio -Columbus Zoo, Powell, Ohio, USA -egg-8a.jpg on commons and shown in gallery on wiki species page. Snowman (talk) 14:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
confirm Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Bird of prey

I am visiting my sister, and my five year old nephew has an assignment to prepare a presentation on a Bird of prey. So at dinner I was talking off the top of my head about birds that hunt other birds, birds that hunt land animals and birds that hunt fish. By my rudimentary definition, pelicans would classify as a bird of prey. Of course, a quick scan on WP shows that they may not be. He said hawks hunt fish, to which I replied that I did not think so. Of course, Osprey are known as sea hawks. I guess the long and the short of it is I am confused on what consititutes a bird of prey (to the possible exclusion of pelicans). Also, I am not sure that seagulls that hunt sea turtles are birds of prey. I would appreciate a little guidance.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Tony, the term has two (overlapping) definitions. The narrower and more formal one (BOP) covers five families of birds (see the formal classification section of the bird of prey article). The other, looser, definition (bop) could cover any bird that catches and consumes animals as the whole, or part, of their diet, including insectivores such as swallows and wrens. Vultures are BOPs but not usually bops. Pelicans and kingfishers are bops but not BOPs. Eagles are both. I would guess that your nephew's assignment would have been intended to refer to the first definition. Maias (talk) 07:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Can those of you knowledgeable on this issue write a short section on this confusion in the article for the readers who will be confused upon reading the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:11, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Many birds will eat other animals, but birds of prey have specialist adaptations such as strongly hooked bills and sharp talons that facilitate this. The bird of prey article lists the two orders which are classed as such. They are the five families of day-flying raptors in the order Falconiformes (hawks, eagles, kites, vultures, Osprey, Secretary Bird etc), and the two families of owls in the order Strigifomes. The question of whether hawks eat fish is confused by the different usages of the term, which has a much wider meaning in NAm than Europe. The Osprey is so specialised that it has its own family, but many other raptors, like the Bald Eagle will take fish as a major part of the diet. I can't think of any hawk (European definition) that takes fish, but I'm not sure about US. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:14, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
That was more good content that should be in article space. You guys all know this. I am not an animal guy. For this subject, I am your typical audience. I can not imagine how many parents are out there trying to figure out why sea gulls and pelicans are not birds of prey. Please put this explanatory content in the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 09:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Damn. I only just realized that the Secretary Bird is a raptor. For all this time, I thought that it was a stork/crane. Yes, I reckon that there should probably be an explanation of the difference between 'bird of prey' and 'predatory bird' somewhere in the article. With something like (thinking of an example off the top of my head) the Skuas, there is definitely room for confusion. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Another group of hunting birds are penguins, which eat fish. Snowman (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
They're predators, but not birds of prey. Same applies to insectivores, waders, storks etc Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys. Thanks for replying. The current change does not adhere to the MOS. The WP:LEAD should be a summary of more detailed content contained in the main body of the article. Thanks for plopping something in the lead quickly. Please put a minimum of a full paragraph in the article on this topic.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

If you guys don't add a section, I will add something without refs based on responses above. This is not my area of expertise and with this many knowledgeable respondents, I find it hard to believe you guys should feel I should be resolving this issue.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Tony, we don't feel you should "be resolving this issue". You posted this yesterday. We haven't finished it yet, but someone did fairly quickly add the bit you asked for explaining what birds of prey are. Yes, it's not perfect. But good grief, give us a chance! Most of us here have day jobs, and most of us are pretty busy with them. We do what we can when we can. You're free to add whatever you'd like in the meantime, but making it sound like we're lazy gits for not getting it done to your specifications within 24 hours isn't really very productive! MeegsC | Talk 04:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:General disclaimer - the disclaimer at the bottom of every wiki page, which is relevant for using the wiki for "mission-critical" projects and many other purposes. Snowman (talk) 11:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure how mission critical the difference is for a nursery school assignment, but I am anxious to properly understand this subject while visiting with my nephew who I see once a year.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I sympathise with readers of the "Bird of prey" article, because it is only at Start grade. The article talk pages discusses some of the problematic issues. WP birds has about about 14000-16000 articles, and the science if ornithology is in a state of flux. Snowman (talk) 22:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
I have added a section on the definition of "bird of prey" to the article, but I have used a rather old second hand book. This is quite likely to need bringing up-to-date, and I would welcome copy-editing of the article and comments at Talk:Bird_of_prey#Wrong_definition. Snowman (talk) 19:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
For a start class article, I am now satisfied with the distinction.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I think that general readers might benefit by following the wikilink in the article to convergent evolution, which is an important concept and, I would say, vital to understand the grouping of the distantly related birds of prey (narrow definition). Snowman (talk) 20:02, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Birds = dinosaurs discussion redux

The topic is discussed at Talk:List_of_common_misconceptions#Birds_are_dinosaurs.3F about this edit. i.e. whether birds are dinosaurs (sigh) Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

As far as I understand, birds are the only surviving clade of dinosaurs. See also feathered dinosaurs. Snowman (talk) 19:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, unfortunately I think the concept of cladistics is not well known to the general populace. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, they are and they are not, depending on the reference system that you are using. If you mean by common decent, yes, but if you mean by similarity, maybe not so much. We are just having a wonderful discussion about paraphyly at taxacom that is deliciously relevant for this topic. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 21:22, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Some modern birds are more primitive than others. I have heard it said that the Cassowary has dinosaur features, and, to me, the Shoebill looks primitive. Snowman (talk) 22:54, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Microraptor, or even Beipiaosaurus, would've looked more similar to an ostrich than to Allosaurus, Triceratops, or Brachiosaurus. Albertonykus (talk) 04:57, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Winter

In the midst of our hardest winter for many years, temperatures below zero even during the day, so the snow hasn't melted, a couple of avian comments.

  • there are at least two Wrens around still. Given that they only eat insects, what species can they be finding to eat?
  • Despite the fact that we live on a hill a good distance from open water, a Moorhen has joined us for the last three weeks. It's obviously surviving on the food we put out, but a couple of queries.
  • We put out water for the birds. The Moorhen seems to drink far than anything else, including the much larger Pheasants. Is this typical of aquatic birds/rails?
  • It was no surprise that during a temporary thaw the Moorhen took to our tiny one-metre long pond. What was more interesting was that when the freeze resumed it took to standing in the 15 cm square water dish to have a wash. Is there a physiological reason, or is it just that aquatic birds like to be in water?

It may well be that there are no obvious answers to the Moorhen questions, just interested Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Has the Wren article been vandalised? It says "Wrens are insectivorous, eating insects and spiders but they will also eat fish, small rodents and lizards." Snowman (talk) 11:01, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Some wren species are big enough to eat lizards. Cactus Wren, for instance, is apparently an omnivore and does eat lizards. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 11:17, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I've removed it since it looks like the work of the "diet of frogs and mice" vandal. It's clearly untrue for most species, and even if is correct for one or two large species (rodents?), it needs a proper cite. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:33, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Yellowhammers eat insects in the summer and eat seeds in the winter. Snowman (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I've made a rough update to feeding, mostly in the Behaviour section. Too lazy to check other sources (though plenty exist for this family), so I just used HBW. Keep in mind that especially Campylorhynchus really are remarkably unlike the well known wren of Europe in both appearance and behavior. HBW doesn't mention anything about small rodents, but I'm pretty sure e.g. a family of Bicolored Wrens would have a go if they got the chance. • Rabo³ • 13:39, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Archives

Why are there two archives on this page? —focus 00:03, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that this page is archived bit by bit and a new archive file is made every now and then when more room is needed. Snowman (talk) 00:21, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
No, I mean why is there one archive box at the top, and another, larger one on the side of the page?
I see, I have changed the parameters in the talk header as a fix leaving the archive box as the only list of archives. Further refinements might be possible, but I guess that the archives have been named in a non-standard way for the talk header. Snowman (talk) 11:29, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

leucorynchus or leucorhynchus?

Just noticed this disparity in the White-breasted Woodswallow page, though I know that sometimes spelling differences occasionally occur (see Todiramphus) just wonder if this an actual 'typo'? Aviceda talk 05:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Just one of the quirks of the zoological nomenclature code I suppose. There are situations where emendations are accepted as justified and others where it is not. Similar case holds for Rynchops and as one author suggests, since the root is Rhyncho- and not Rhyn- an emendation should be Rhychocops !

Help!

I've tried to change the kinglet species list to a table, but I've done something wrong and can't see what it is. Please help! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:24, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Repaired, 4-column table formatted. Snowman (talk) 17:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Help with grouse

Would someone with knowledge about grouse confirm that the black grouse is also called the "black cock" or "blackcock" and the caucasian black grouse is also called the "caucasian black cock"? If not, than the redirects at Black Cock and Caucasian Black Cock should be RfD'd. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:57, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

The species are correct although strictly speaking these links refer to the males (female Black Grouse is Grey Hen) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:07, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
British Names of Birds (Jackson, 1968) give Black cock as a widespread usage. --Chuunen Baka (talk • contribs) 16:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

unidentified birds

I've been recategorising some of the unidentified images on Commons, these should be easy for the NAm editors bird of prey, another, Mexican ant thingy. There are lots more, but many are unidentifiable or not worth the effort Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll rename the first one to adult Harris's Hawk and the third one to Barred Antshrikes. The second one is puzzling me—it looks sort of like an immature Swainson's Hawk, but it would be an odd one, I think, and I don't believe there should still be Swainson's Hawks in New Mexico on November 21. Maybe someone else will know. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 14:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
That's a Northern Harrier. Looks like a youngster to me, given the lovely rufous underparts. MeegsC | Talk 02:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Gosh, I should have known that. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, harrier recatted and moved to File:Circus cyaneus Bitter Lakes Nov 2010.jpg — I should have known that too Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:49, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
There's another photo in the series, Birds Bitter Lake Nov 2010.jpg that also needs renaming. I've updated the description to identify the birds as Sandhill Cranes, and have added the appropriate category, but I don't know how to rename the file. Can someone here do that? MeegsC | Talk 21:31, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Write this template on the commons file: {{rename needs confirmation|name.jpg|reason}}. Snowman (talk) 23:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Snowman. MeegsC | Talk 00:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
FWIW, Snowman and I (at least) both have Commons filemover rights, so we should be able to rename files if necessary. AFAIK, no one on the project is a Commons admin, so deletion tags will need to be used if needed Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I do not guarantee to deal with move requests from everyone, so I suggested putting the move template (as above) on the commons file. Snowman (talk) 22:51, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Help 2

I've started a long term project on kinglet. It's a bit strange, but I can't find a reliable source for the Taiwan Firecrest, not even for its appearance. I have books for the Palaearctic and for SE Asia, but Taiwan falls between these regions. Anything out there please? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Yikes...I guess a birds of Taiwan book is in order...I'll check at the uni library when it reopens. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I've got "Birds of East Asia" (Mark Brazil), "Birds of China" (Rodolphe Meyer de Schauensee) and "A Field Guide to the Birds of China" (John MacKinnon & Karen Phillipps), plus HBW, all of which have at least some information about TF. If you'll stick a {{cn}} next to bits you'd like checked, I'm happy to help where I can. MeegsC | Talk 21:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, that's great. For the moment, I just need a description for the table in Kinglet, but looking forward, if you could email me the HBW species article, that would be really useful Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

King Vulture redux

King Vulture is still at FARC where editors vote to keep or remove its FAC status. I managed to update and expand quite a bit. Still a few lingering web refs it'd be good to use a peer reviewed article or bird text to cite, so if folks can take a look and comment on their view of the current situation that'd be great. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Ref 46 is messed up, but I can't fix it, as I don't know what it should be... MeegsC | Talk 20:27, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
damn, that is a deadlink and needs replacing - I readded from archive for the moment. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:25, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Antbird on main page.

Antbird will be on the main page on the 4th of January. Looking at the blurb due to be on the main page, I notice that the family name, Thamnophilidae, has been dropped. I don't think it should be, but I'd be interested to see what other people think. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

You're an admin, so you can change it if you want, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, that might have been me in making a bunch of text squeeze in the pale green box (I proposed the article for the main page a few days ago. Readd it if you want :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I understand that, I'm just curious if other people think its important. If it isn't I'm happy to leave as is. Sabine's Sunbird talk 18:54, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
  1. ^ Thomas, Gavin H.; Wills, Matthew A. & Székely, Tamás (2004): A supertree approach to shorebird phylogeny. BMC Evol. Biol. 4: 28. doi:10.1186/1471-2148-4-28 PDF fulltext Supplementary Material
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/Archive_52&oldid=1210620319"