Talk:Gray hawk

message: I have gray hawks around my house they hunt in a pack of four  there
young hawks . please send me a picture of your hawk  and email if this is common for hawks to hunt together.  ive been watching these birds foe awhile.
:You can get lots of pictures by searching for gray hawk on Google images. Buteos are often seen flying in groups, but usually hunt alone. However, I don't know this species well enough to say whether it does hunt in groups. jimfbleak 05:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I recommend splitting off Gray-lined Hawk (B. nitidus) from Gray Hawk (B. plagiatus), per AOU 2012. Natureguy1980 (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I was waiting for the SACC to issue issue their final rule on the Gray-lined Hawk, and look well on their way to issuing their final rule.  I'm OK either way.....Pvmoutside (talk) 20:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Split approved by SACC in August.  Created article for Grey-lined Hawk today.....Pvmoutside (talk) 17:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

text: The bird project uses the IOC World list as its standard for nomenclature, not regional lists. IOC uses Grey, presumably because there are more BE countries in its range than there are AE (and it's a bit marginal in the US anyway). I've fixed the inconsistency too. Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 06:32, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's surprising. (The "grey" had struck me, too, but I hadn't yet checked IOC. Aside: I'm Australian, so grey is the normal spelling for me, but I was mentally correcting it to "gray" because it is an American species.)  Is it because of the English-speaking Caribbean countries?  Normally for species in Spanish-speaking South American countries, the en-US usage seems to win out over en-GB. Pelagic (talk) 10:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  (Actually, I probably wouldn't have noticed "grey", except I was adding a redirect and misspelt it.). Pelagic (talk) 10:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Split of Gray Hawk

message: I'm having a few problems with this article as it stands (or rather stood, before I started messing with it). 
One type I can address: simple inconsistencies, like B. plagiatus in the lead, but B. nitidis in the taxobox.  Or "recently split by the AOU" versus "the American Ornithologist Union does not recognize".  That type I can amend, if there are checkable sources. 
The third thing is the remnants of some broken referencing system. That deserves a separate section. 
Secondly, there is the following paragraph: 
The grey hawk was originally Asturina nitida but controversy existed between ornithologists on whether or not this species was closely enough related enough to put it in the Buteo, but chromosomal mapping in 2013 has proved that the grey hawk is within the Buteoninae.[8](de Oliveira ... Chromosome Painting) Researchers such as de Oliveira, Tagliarini, dos Santos, O'Brien, and Ferguson-Smith proposed in 2011 that the gray hawk should be two different species, because of a slight difference in plumage colour and a difference in alarm calls documented in the northern and southern distributional gap in Costa Rica. They suggest that the species is better split into the grey-lined hawk, Buteo nitidus and the grey hawk Buteo plagiatus),[9](Millsap ... Gray Hawk ... is Two Species) but the American Ornithologist Union does not recognize the grey hawk as two different species. So far under the size range criteria this species' population is not vulnerable.
It's saying "de Oliveira ... proposed ... in 2011" but then citing Millsap 2011. Plus, we have "related enough to put it in the Buteo", but "within the Buteoninae". Maybe it will make some more sense if I find and read de Oliveira's paper, but maybe not. 
It could be a simple bad cut, but I'm not sure I have the strength to go through tens or hundreds of previous versions to find the original intent. 
Pelagic (talk) 12:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difficulties 1 

message: There are several numbers enclosed in parenthesis in the Reproduction section of the article. These are probably intended as citation references, but I strongly suspect that they have incorrect numbers. It would be helpful if this could be checked and fixed. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:20, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers in parenthesis in the Reproduction section 

message: In the Voice section, the article says "The call of the grey hawk consists of long mournful whistles thoooooweeo, hoooooweeo." The cited source (Sibley) is not available online. The use of italics looks very strange – why is there an initial "t" that is not in italics followed by other characters that are in italic font? When I look for descriptions on the web, I seem to find inconsistent and even contradictory information. A page by Cornell University says they make two vocalizations – a three-note whistle and a single-note alarm call. Other sources and the current article seem to refer to a two-syllable sound. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of the bird's call