Talk:European nightjar

message: *I think that the small chicks themselves are highly camouflaged according to a copyrighted image I saw of another night-jar species on Flickr. This needs feathers (or fluff), so I wonder if chicks have feathers when they hatch. Snowman (talk) 11:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: They do, I'll clarify that. The brown and buff plumage is inconspicuous, but they will mostly be concealed by the brooding adult until fledged Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 12:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll clarify that, they can move independently, but need brooding Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 12:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

text: I'll change to nest-site. There is no structure at all, they nest on bare ground, pine needles or leaf litter, whatever is there as long as it's flat enough. Any depression is from the sitting bird, not scraped. Unlike waders, these birds are not really designed for digging. I can't find anything as to whether they remove droppings. I would guess not, since the chicks are mobile, but I don't know Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 12:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

text: For obvious reasons, the diet is mainly known from stomach contents or pellets, direct observation being almost impossible. I might remove the spiders, since that's a bit speculative and only a very minor part of the diet Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 12:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

text: The source refers to domestic, which is more likely than feral to be in that sort or habitat when walked by owners, so I've added that. I don't imagine that feral would be any better news though. Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 13:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've expanded the dog bit in "Status" a little Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 15:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

text: I wondered myself, fair enough. Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 14:00, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

text: I had to check myself, it's a photomontage, added caption to that effect. Change to "composite photograph" if you prefer that Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 13:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

text: Not sure what you are getting at here, Snowman. Owls have virtually silent flight, and I've never heard a swish, although I accept that it's not impossible. Nightjars aren't related closely to owls and are in general smaller, so no reason to suppose they swish even if owls do. Do you have a link? Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 13:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Whoops, I did not write that very well, so I will strike the mention of owls. The text is somewhere in the three-page section linked to Coloured figures of the birds of the British Islands / issued by Lord Lilford. Snowman (talk) 14:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Lilford is obviously a reliable source, but it's a nineteenth century ref, and I couldn't find anything later, apart from a description of an evening nightjar walk where it wasn't clear whether the swish was audible or a visual description. My instinct is to leave it out, but it's not a big deal if you would prefer it in Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 15:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *The swish is not as important as the silent flight, which is mentioned in the culture section, but not in the biology sections unless I missed it. Snowman (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, I'll fix tomorrow Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 19:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, include anatomical features of feathers that would enhance silent flight. Snowman (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Added to description Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 07:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

text: They mean goatsucker, added Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 13:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's "Ziegenmelker" in German (the capitalisation is required in nouns and proper names, and the vowels were swapped). I edited that. Technically "Ziegenmelker" means "goat milker" [as in a person who is milking a goat], not "goat sucker", but it does refer to the same old belief of them sucking at goats. 87.158.3.145 (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

text: I'll have another look in the morning, probably needs splitting to two sentences. The bird and the disease it was supposed to cause were both called Puckeridge, the actual vector being a fly. Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 19:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I have just found something about puckeridge (also called wornels) at An Encyclopædia of Agriculture. Flies lay there eggs in the backs of cattle, which cause lumps.  The maggots get out leaving a hole in the hide. Nightjars were blamed for the lumps. I wonder what the modern name for this cattle disease is? Snowman (talk) 20:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Incidentally, Vector (epidemiology) would be the wrong word to use, because a vector transmits an infective disease. In the case of this fly, they lay their eggs in the skin of an animal. Snowman (talk) 21:04, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a similar old book which makes it clear that these are Oestridae botflies, which fits the description of maggots under the skin. 07:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Puckeridge" has an entry in Dictionary of Names of British Birds (1913). It is also called Puck-bird. It seems that these are regional English names. Snowman (talk) 10:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reluctant to include that etymology since it's an old source making a tenuous suggestion that isn't supported by OED. Do you think it's worth including puck-bird? It's hard to know when to stop with what seems an endless number of old, regional or poetic names for this bird Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 10:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What I am trying to get at is possible expansion in the article to explain that the mysterious and unknown aspect of the little-seen nightjar lead to superstitions or folklore about the bird having a dark and sinister side.  I have seen the theme of Puck the "evil spirit" in other websites, which indicate that the old folklore implies that the nightjar has a supposed dark/evil nature and explain the name associations with Puck.  Is it might be worth connecting various regional old names with Puck, apparently an evil spirit. I am not sure if it is the same Puck in the Wiki article Puck (mythology). It may only need an emphasis change (without mention of Puck) to the current text to write in that mystery about the bird (and perhaps its calls) was falsely elaborated with an evil nature in folklore. Snowman (talk) 11:27, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

text: (outdent) fair enough, I may not have time to do it today though. Jimfbleak -  talk to me? 11:43, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on European nightjar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129141623/http://uregina.ca/~fisherry/nighthawk2.pdf to http://uregina.ca/~fisherry/nighthawk2.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: could you check my edits here, and see if any of this can be updated?  SandyGeorgia (Talk)  00:53, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for that, I've made a partial update, I'll see if I can find individual country counts for those mentioned, but I suspect that my source would have used them if they were available Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I've added a global population, nothing more on country figures Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:45, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  URFA/2020 update? 

message: Interesting, that any information to the formerly valid species C. centralasicus is completely ignored. --Melly42 (talk) 15:12, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:   Unwanted information?