Talk:Raven

message: I don't want to start a reversion war, so I'm just leaving this here. This edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Raven&diff=695870974&oldid=695870803 If I knew the species, I would have put it there instead of creating a new section. But it isn't listed. There are plenty of types of animals that have an article that lists the animal's diet or lifespan, even if the name of the animal refers to multiple species. 2601:600:8500:5B1:218:E7FF:FE7D:6AFA (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 07:00, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed information 

message: There is a discussion at Talk:Ravens#Requested move 10 May 2019 to make this article primary for the plural to. Crouch, Swale (talk)  16:54, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ravens" 

message: "These species do not form a single taxonomic group within the genus."
Actually, they mostly do:
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/A-summary-of-the-BAYES-LAGRANGE-ancestral-area-analysis-for-the-genus-Corvus-The-tree-is_fig2_225071838
All non-Australasian ravens form a single clade in Corvus that only includes Corvus albus and Corvus edithae among birds not colloquially called "ravens". Even the Australasian ravens are all sister taxa to each other. Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 12:46, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: As you said, that is including two non-raven species. Ravens, in and of themselves alone, are not a valid taxonomic group.--Khajidha (talk) 21:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: This is sort of semantics. All non-Australasian ravens are closely related to each other and out of the two "non-raven" species the one is also called "dwarf raven" and the other is noted to be "raven-like" and readily hybridizing with the previous.--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 07:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And yet that Australian raven exists, inherently disproving your assertion that all species with the word "raven" in their name form a taxonomic group. In short, the argument doesn't hold water because its self-contradictory. Especially since the passage is specifically about semantics, which is to say what the word means. oknazevad (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

text: You have given examples of ravens that are not in this single group and of non-ravens that are, both conditions which would preclude ravens from being a clade of their own. --Khajidha (talk) 13:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: "You have given examples of ravens that are not in this single group." "Yes, "these species do not form a single taxonomic group within the genus.", they represent two, Australasian ravens and non-Australasian ravens. "of non-ravens that are", "non-raven", singular, one out of 8 species, and even this was noted to be extremely raven like. It's not like when it comes to common, traditional and colloquial names of taxa we expect them to had been 100% cladistically correct.--Draco ignoramus sophomoricus (talk) 16:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is exactly the point. The word "raven" is a common name, not a scientific one. It does not correspond one-to-one to a single taxonomical subdivision. Which is exactly what the sentence says. oknazevad (talk) 16:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ravens as valid clades 

message: Raise your hand if you've ever heard anyone say "oh look there's a treachery of ravens on the telephone wire". Yeah. I removed a (referenced! shock! horror!) passage about a "treachery of ravens" being a thing. Even if it were, see WP:NOT#DICTIONARY. Sadly it was reverted by User:Oknazevad. Just because it has a reference doesn't mean it should be in the article. Yeah the Reader's Digest Big Book of Whacky Sayings lists "raining cats and dogs" but that doesn't mean we add it to rain. --Cornellier (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If you look at the links, they're ridiculous references as well - they're basically Geocities pages from the 00s. I'm sure the University of California Golf Club is an authority on avian etymology. Zhutwo (talk) 07:38, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  But nobody actually says "treachery / conspiracy of ravens"