Talk:Parrot/Archive 1

message: The article mentions the fact that some species are threatened with extinction - in a sentence which begins with a reference to parrots' popularity as pets.  This reflects a bias.  No mention is made anywhere in the article of the effects of hunting for sport, food, and feathers, or the effect of habitat destruction, which are far greater threats to parrots than the pet industry ever was.
In fact, the entire paragraph discussing the endangered status of many parrots and the Tony Silva case should not have been placed under the heading, "Parrots as Pets," as this is also reflective of bias.  More appropriate under that heading would be a discussion of parrots' care requirements in captivity, which is notably absent from the article.
--The pet trade has long been established as a critical melting point for avian populations. Omitting or prioritizing this information below any other form of population loss because you feel it has a certain bias is illogical. --EllisD 03:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment 3

message: (From Talk:parrot (family))
Am I missing something? Is there a reason we have Parrot (family) and Parrot (order) at all? Why not just move them to Psittaciformes and Psittacidae. Then the disambig can point to those. I didn't do an extensive search, but it seems that using the taxonomic name as the real link is standard. If no one objects, I'll make the change later today. - UtherSRG 13:20, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: See Talk:parrot (family) for why this won't happen. - UtherSRG 18:10, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article taxonomy 

message: Contribute at Talk:Parrot#What is a parrot? or, Are cockatoos parrots? Nurg 09:18, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they are a type of a parrot; they have strong beaks and legs and they have two toes foreward and two toes backward on each foot, as do all parrots.  Non-parrots have three toes foreward and one toe backward.  However, cockatoos are not true parrots.  True parrots and cockatoos are parrots. Snowman 11:40, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is a parrot? or, Are cockatoos parrots?

message: cockatoos are parrots —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spat10 (talk • contribs) 
:That is why we are doing all this moving around KimvdLinde 15:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 18:10, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Working in it KimvdLinde 15:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change

message: Two links were removed for either being overly partisan or having overly partisan titles.
--Bhabing 19:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate Links 

message: Just came across this page, which mentions that parrots have relatively large brains compared to most other birds---and in fact, have a forebrain/body mass ratio in line with primates.
It's an interesting factoid, that could probably work its way into a new section in this article. --Iskunk 06:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parrot smarts 

message: The article uses this term for some small parrots, without defining it taxonomically or otherwise.
The distinction is not very clear, however "parakeet" generally refers to any smaller parrot with a long tail.  I don't think it's a scientific classification.  Some people use the word "parakeet" interchangably with budgerigar, however there are other parakeets besides the common budgie.  Some, such as the Bourk's parakeet, definitely fall under the category; others, such as conures are debatable.
:Mainly some Broad-tailed parrots and psittaculines. For Neotropic parakeets, the alternate name conure exists. Dysmorodrepanis 03:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is why I don't understand the AOU officially calling conures "parakeets" and Amazons "parrots", replacig two very useful and specific terms with general/ambiguous ones.....cheers,  Casliber | talk  |  contribs 23:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 1) The AOU is not in charge of common-name nomenclature (it would like to be, but nobody is - that's why they're called common names). The US Fish & Wildlife Service still calls them conures; so does the British OU.  2)I can't understand it either. Amazons are a cohesive group from a single genus (Amazona). Calling them all "Parrot" instead of "Amazon" is just information hiding. I consider it confusing and stupid. 3)Conures are a diverse group of birds from many genera. Still, it at least did tell you they were American. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brucemoko (talk • contribs) 07:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's a parakeet? 

message: Anyone care to add a pronunciation for Psittaciformes? Cburnett 17:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My father knows psittacines as (I don't know IPA): si-tass-ines.  "si" as in "sick"; "tass" as in "tassel"; and "ines" as in "magazines".  But that means I have no reference to back that up.  Cburnett 00:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Regarding "quaker" parrots:   "Quaker parrot" is a common (pet trade) but incorrect name for Monk Parakeet. Need to remove the last line of this section referring to quakers as they are part of the earlier mentioin of feral monk parakeets.
-- The Monk Parakeet, aka Quaker Parrot, aka Quaker Parakeet, aka Grey-breasted Parakeet, aka Cliff Parakeet, has only one truly correct name: Myiopsitta monachus. Which of the others is "correct" is a matter of politics, and varies not only between languages but even between different English speaking countries. E.g., the two Amazon parrots next to me right now are generally called a Red-lored and a Mexican Red-head in the USA, but a Yellow-cheeked and a Green-cheeked in England.  While it's good to be consistent within the article, I'd probably say "Monk (or Quaker)" the first time. It's more important to be helpful than to be politically correct.
Brucemoko 22:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feral Parrots 

message: I've read comments on "Genius Bird" by User:BorgQueen who unilaterally deleted the link (something she's received many complaints about) and find them unwarranted by the policies she cited. The addition to Parrot was entirely within the scope of the sections on intelligence and mimickry. --68.221.0.226 14:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I got only one complaint (from you) but I am not going to remove it if you add the link back. If the consensus agrees it will stay. --BorgQueen 15:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genius Bird 

message: See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Aviculture.  The purpose of this project is to help increase the amount and quality of content related to aviculture on wikipedia, and to maintain and organise articles relating to the subject, eventually bringing as many as possible up to good- or featured-article status. Snowman 16:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aviculture WikiProject proposal 

message: I'm in the process of collecting info to begin expanding this article. One thing I think that needs to be done to this article is to split out the section on feral parrots into its own article (with obvioulsy a summary left behind in this article). The section is quite long and could be expanded more. Any objections? Sabine's Sunbird  talk 01:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea.  There is certainly a lot more that could be put in; the current section is only the tip of the beak (to coin a phrase).  Maias 02:07, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm for this too jimfbleak 06:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Yep, there's a bunch of them. And there's others that are really taking the ball and running with it in Oz (Galahs, Sulphur Cresteds, Corellas etc.)cheers,  Casliber | talk  |  contribs 07:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Probably only by comparing 18th-19th century naturalists' notes on their distribution with the situation today. Dysmorodrepanis 17:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting out feral parrots 

message: Why Do Parrots Have Thick Colorful feathers? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.112.65.129 (talk • contribs).
:In a nutshell, most likely because they a) live in climates that are harsh on the feathers (in the tropics, feather-eating molds and bacteria and insects thrive, in dry and hot regions such as in Australia, there is a lot of abrasive dust), and b) their bill is not too well suited for preening. The colors can generally be considered a social signal, enabling conspecifics to recognize each other in the habitat; the voice of parrots is under natural conditions not varied enough to provide the wide range of social signals which it does in songbirds for example. You'll note that the most colorful areas are the wings - which show up in flight - and the head - the head plumage can be carried in many poses which indicate the bird's mood. Amazon parrots for example can prop up a small crest when they are excited; normally you don't see it but the birds are apparently able to control which feathers are flush and which ones are fluffed quite well. Dysmorodrepanis 17:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feathers? 

message: So I've added about a page of material in the past few days, and I'm surprised at the extensive conversation on classification & evolution, and the amount of attention paid to only one aspect of this topic.  I added two historical references, a link to a US law, a link to a recent major Mexican study, a published census result of the number of pet parrots in the US, a reference to a major UK conservation group that work internationally, the CITES material referencing parrots... etc., etc, in addition to mentioning common local resources around the industrialized world such as zoos and clubs.
As much as we like organizing things let's not forget that a good article should focus on all the important aspects of its topic!  Parrots have had a major impact on human culture including art, law, religion and companionship!
:The unbalanced nature of this article at present is an artefact of the skills and efforts of contributing editors, not any particular design. We happen to have an editor that is very good at the taxonomy aspect and he has worked on this and many other articles in that field. The rest of us haven't yet gotten around to improving the rest of the article yet, but seeing as how it is currently joint top of the rankings for next months collaboration of the month it looks like some improving is on the way. There is no shortage of good material on parrots, both in relation to humans and in relation to their natural lives (breeding, feeding, behaviour, ecology etc), and we can all bring different things to the article once its the COTM. Thank you for your contributions, btw, and please consider registering and signing your talk page contributions. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 21:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia: not just for taxonomy 

message: I just created a category "Category:Talking birds" for birds capable of imitating human speech. With the large number of bird species that have this ability I feel a category would be appropriate. I could use some help getting this filled.JeffStickney 17:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. I'll go ahead and tag some. --Kurt Shaped Box 21:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Category- Talking birds 

message: I think true parrots should be merged with parrots because it does not contain much information but has good pictures and it would also help the parrots article.Swirlex 19:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True parrots needs wotrk for sure but the two are different, one is an order the other a family. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 02:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge