Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 13

message: Following peer review, (thanks particularly to Meegs), I've now put Barn Swallow up for FAC. Jimfbleak (talk) 07:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC 

message: I've tried to modify the page for the Laysan ʻApapane as best I could, considering it generally is considered a subspecies. It had been started (by Istavan - of Mialoa fame) as if it generally was considered a species. Are there any general rules on subspecies pages now where it has been started? In particular the Taxobox? Rabo3 (talk) 08:49, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It might be better to merge it with the species page, and treat it in a separate section there (with a redirect for the subspecific name), particularly if it's not likely to expand much beyond the stub it is now. MeegsC | Talk 09:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How about subspecies pages? 

message: An editor pointed out a problem with the definition on the talk page of this article. I have changed the lead, but I am unable to find a citation that explicitly states that Zugunruhe is a state of restlessness found in birds during the onset of the migratory season in the wild and also observed in captivity (rather than seen only in captivity as it earlier stated). I do not remember having seen definitions that restricted the phenomenon to captive birds in the past, however some of the references cited in that article have a statements that suggests so. Clarification with good sources in the lead in this article would be useful. Shyamal (talk) 12:11, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Zugunruhe]] 

message: Would like a review before this can be taken towards GA. Shyamal (talk) 04:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review request for [[Ornithology]] 

message: Needs attention and possibly a move to Altricial to fit with Precocial. Shyamal 01:13, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly needs to be moved, as the singular of "altrices" is "altrix", not that either of those is in the New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary.  I'd prefer "Altricial", as you say.  —JerryFriedman  (Talk) 21:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Altrice]] 

message: Today (Dec. 4)'s Main page article is the California Condor. If its not already, could everyone please put it on their watchlist to revert the vandalism a main page article typically attracts? Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow 02:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And congratulations on getting it on there (and keeping wrestlers and cartoons OFF!) Totnesmartin 17:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[California Condor]] on Main Page 

message: Just wrote this, and will now proceed to submit it over at T:TDYK, but I'd appreciate if people could give it a review,maybe add stuff about his scientific significance in the field, given that I have relatively little on that. Circeus 03:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Charles Foster Batchelder]] 

message: A recently suggested move of the Sun Conure article to Sun Parakeet has resulted in a rather lengthy discussions on its talk page. Any additional input would be appreciated; esp. in regards of the general naming rules - if any - typically applied to pages for birds. Thanks Rabo3 (talk) 16:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conure/Parakeet 

message: OK folks, there is a deadlock on the choice for collaboration 'tween teh Kea and the Barn Owl at 4 votes each...consider breaking said deadlock or voting for the dark horse if you so desire.....cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collaboration deadlock and [[Barn Swallow]] at FAC 

message: Barn Swallow has passed FA, great input from the project. The bad news is that I've started ever so slowly tweaking Blackbird.Jimfbleak (talk) 06:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations Jim!  One question though: why is Blackbird tweaking bad news? : ) MeegsC | Talk 09:55, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes lots of work for everyone who edits, reviews, etc ( : Jimfbleak (talk) 12:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Again, congratulations on passing it! Now, if I could only find time to actually do the oft-promised Andean Condor... Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 14:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barn Swallow 

message: There is a discussion here. Permalink is here. Samsara (talk • contribs) 14:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What featured pictures should be acceptable for birds? 

message: It has pretty much been ready for months. So I threw it to FAC. If there are any other problems they are minor so go and comment! Hopefully now I can go back to simpler more fun things. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 00:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Bird]] at FAC.... 

message: All the classification boxes ignore the fact that bird are in fact dinosaurs. T.Neo (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: amen to that and further on the last analogy - the fish article folks refuse a taxobox! Shyamal (talk) 04:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Er... Sauropsida could never be a junior synonym of Aves. And also, Aves isn't paraphyletic. Sheep81 (talk) 03:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sheep81, no, and I never said Aves was paraphyletic (which it, as you clearly know, isn't). I just said that the Linnaeus system isn't limited to monophyletic groups. The Aves versus Sauropsida comment was said tongue in cheek, and I thought that was clear, but if it was not - my mistake (obviously, no one would ever serious suggest moving the whole deal to Aves!). Part of the problem is the dual use of Sauropsida - sometimes used for the polyphyletic group which popularly could be called reptiles, amphibians and dinosaurs (roughly Reptilia), and sometimes (better, the way it originally was intended and is correct as per cladistics) for the monophyletic group, which also includes the birds (+ a few smaller groups of arguably more problematic status). So, there's the problem, we've got one class, which, from the cladistic point of viuew, includes another class (and the Linnaeus system is pretty clear about the probs in that). Could it be argued that Aves should be changed - well, yes, but there's part of the point I was trying to make earlier: If nothing is gained (which I, at best, would question in this case), then the Linnaeus system does not require that the change, as it does not necessarily require that names are restricted to monophyletic groups. Of course, if was speaking to colleagues or writing a scientific paper on the phylogenetic affinities of these clades that would be a different matter, but wiki is not a "biologists & paleontologists only" club, and when most people think about birds, they think about the extant species. Rabo3 (talk) 05:56, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize, I was reading your comment backwards. Personally, if taxoboxes are going to use Linnaean ranks then I am just fine with Class Aves for birds and Class Sauropsida for all other reptiles. Linnaean ranks are inherently subjective so I don't really see the point in trying to tie them to phylogeny, making them all monophyletic. The taxobox is kind of a shortcut for people so it's best to use terminology that is more widely understood. That's my opinion. Sheep81 (talk) 06:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  why ignore an important link? 

message: I think the input from various editors now makes this a fairly comprehensive article, so I'm putting it up for peer review. Please make any changes required or comment here Jimfbleak (talk) 08:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Blackbird]] 

message: Dear Wikimedians,
This is a (belated) announcement that requests are now being taken for illustrations to be created for the Philip Greenspun illustration project (PGIP).
The aim of the project is to create and improve illustrations on Wikimedia projects. You can help by identifying which important articles or concepts are missing illustrations (diagrams) that could make them a lot easier to understand. Requests should be made on this page: Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project/Requests
If there's a topic area you know a lot about or are involved with as a Wikiproject, why not conduct a review to see which illustrations are missing and needed for that topic? Existing content can be checked by using Mayflower to search Wikimedia Commons, or use the Free Image Search Tool to quickly check for images of a given topic in other-language projects.
The community suggestions will be used to shape the final list, which will be finalised to 50 specific requests for Round 1, due to start in January. People will be able to make suggestions for the duration of the project, not just in the lead-up to Round 1.
* General information about the project: m:Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project
* Potential illustrators and others interested in the project should join the mailing list: mail:greenspun-illustrations
thanks, pfctdayelise (talk) 13:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[m:GIP|Greenspun illustration project]]: requests now open 

message: Is it a Saffron Finch? Bamse (talk) 09:37, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure is. Rabo3 (talk) 15:45, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Bamse (talk) 07:26, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ID of Hawaiian bird 

message: There is another debate about capitalization at the MoS talk page. This one started as a comment specific to birds, but it appears to be getting bigger than that. Anyone wishing to join the debate please do so. Justin chat 18:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another capitalization debate 

message: While there, at least for birds, is nothing to discuss in regards of the standard capitalization of e.g. Rufous Twistwing (as evidently is being discussed elsewhere), I would point out that, contrary to the information given on the front-page of this group, it is not a generally accepted standard that "the word immediately following a hyphen in a species name is not capitalised". This is true per BOU, but not per AOU, which generally follow the rules recommended by Parkes, 1978 (PDF). An example: Black-crowned Night-heron (correct per BOU) contra Black-crowned Night-Heron (correct per AOU). In short, the "AOU rules" depend on the "truth" of the name, i.e. if it really belongs to the group, it should be in capital. Hence, the Black-crowned Night-Heron, which really is a heron (Ardeidae), should have "heron" in capital per AOU. An example of the contrary is the Superb Fairy-wren, where "wren" shouldn't be written in capital per "AOU rules", as it isn't a wren (Troglodytidae). Not surprisingly, there is a general tendency for African, European, Asian and Australian authorities & bird guides to follow the BOU, while authorities & bird guides in the Americas (North, Central & South + Caribbean) generally follow AOU. Anyhow, I'm not sure how the front-page of this group came to be, but it might be worth mentioning the disagreement among the various authorities on this specific issue. Rabo3 (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  capitalization of word following hyphen in bird names 

message: There is a current proposal to change an animal-related naming convention, which directly effects the the Manual of Style guideline, and the naming conventions policy. If you are interested, your input would be appreciated. Justin chat 06:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change to [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (fauna)]] 

message: Notice:  The article on Malayan Peacock-pheasant may not be in the right location...not sure how capitialization works on hyphenated birds.  I mention this not because I want it corrected but in case any of you nice folks think it needs to be corrected.  TableManners U·T·C 05:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is probably correct in that I ran into a bunch of these hypenated bird names in lowercase after the -.  TableManners U·T·C 06:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, assuming wiki should follow the majority, then Malayan Peacock-pheasant is correct (or alternatively Malayan Peacock Pheasant). As mentioned in my post on the 15th of December here on the bird groups talk page, the majority of European, African, Asian & Australian authorities always keep the word following a hyphen in lower case. The case for birds of the Americas is a bit different, and before realizing that these rules perhaps not were obvious to everybody (though I'm sure most ornithologists, birders & other bird interested have noticed that some words in bird-names typically are written in upper case following a hyphen in the Americas, but perhaps weren't aware of the exact rules behind it), I did modify a few pages to follow the majority (e.g. Tit-Tyrants and Warbling Antbird). Many of the bird pages are initially started by a bot, which I doubt could be easily programmed to use the American rules (considering that it require some knowledge about relationships). Regardless, I'll leave it at that for now, but perhaps suggest a minor modification to the front page of this group to follow the majority of authorities in the specific regions, instead of, as now, follow a tiny minority for names of birds from the Americas (anyhow, at earliest any such proposal will be post-New Year, as I just don't have the time now). Rabo3 (talk) 20:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malayan Peacock-pheasant? 

message: There is a current CfD discussing a potential change to :Category:Animal articles without taxoboxes. There are two proposed changes: :Category:Animal articles needing a taxobox and :Category:Animal articles without infoboxes. At present time there is no consensus, so input from the WP:ANIMAL editors would be appreciated. . Justin chat 19:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change in taxobox categories 

message: Yay! Bird just passed its FAC today, bringing us up to 24 featured bird articles. Congrats to all who helped. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 19:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: .....I was going to hunt around for some clever pic of a bottle of champagne but my computer connection's a bit slow...anyway, great collaborative effort on an improtant article. Now the Portal is complete..cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Huge thanks to everyone that helped with the copy editing at the end there. I am so glad that is over with. Although one reviewer slapped a dozen citation tags on it right at the end, so these need to be dealt with (I've gotten most of them except in the human section). Sabine's Sunbird  talk 01:19, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent work, everybody!  That was a real collaborative effort at the end—after Sabine's Sunbird did a huge amount of work getting it ready for the final push! MeegsC | Talk 23:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bird passed its FAC! 

message: I've just learned (from a comment left on the article's talk page) that Flight feather is slated to be featured on the "Main Page" on 25 December.  As I'm currently staying with relatives (and don't have my regular internet connection), I'd sure appreciate any assistance fellow editors can give at reverting the inevitable vandalism! : ) Thanks, MeegsC | Talk 18:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ....can't think of the link between...Xmas and flight feathers....some strays sticking out as one hoes down on one's turkey?cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've been half thinking of pushing Christmas Shearwater to FA just so it can be the Christmas Day FA. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 23:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a great idea. Only other one I can think of is Christmas Island Frigatebird...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flight feather 

message: I'm going to nominate this for FAC soonish and realised no-one else has looked at it. Any glaring errors or improvements pointed out greatly received. I was in Margaret River and there were loads of these little critters and I managed to get a couple of neat shots with a 300mm lens (and loads of blurry patches of blue. Thank god I don't have paper film anymore!!!). This species was more studied than the Variegated Fairy-wren so I managed to get more stuff in behaviourally. I'll give the wrens a rest after this I promise...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I nominated. cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, feeling v. happy now :) cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:15, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Red-winged Fairy-wren]] 

message: What is the point in having both a :Category: Owls and :Category: Strigiformes? I'm not a bird expert, but they seem to be identical content-wise, but with :Category: Strigiformes being the much better organized of the two. Thoughts?Abyssal leviathin (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The primary difference is that the categories are sorted completely differently: "owls" is a general topical category, ad could include Owls in fiction if we had them, whereas "strigiformes" is a strict taxonomic category, part of the :Category:Birds by classification scheme. I've added :category:fictional owls as a subcategory to mark the difference better. Circeus (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. Okay, I guess that makes sense. I'll see if I can help organize them in a way that accents the difference as well. Happy editing. :) Abyssal leviathin (talk) 01:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Me again. On a related note to the above, do you think that the specific owl species, especially obscure ones, should be removed from the Owls cat and into the Strigiformes? I mean, it seems odd that a general topic category would be filled with so many obscure taxa. Abyssal leviathin (talk) 01:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And boy are there a heap of fictional owls which could go inta that one...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

text: When I considered the question, I decided to keep English and Latin categories wherever the English names did not perfectly match genus/family boundaries (the issue is markedly more prominent for my native French, where laridae are split between mouettes and goéland, Corvidae between corbeaux and corneille, and Strigiformes between hiboux, chouettes and a few more oddballs). Circeus (talk) 05:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category:Owls 

message: Today user:Invertzoo asked me about Hooded Merganser, concerning the passage, "Although they have occurred as vagrants to Europe, this attractive species is so common in collections that only a ringed bird would be likely to be accepted as anything other than an escape." We were wondering what  "collection" means in this sense. We were thinking of museum collections, but guess it could mean a selection of ornamental birds on property, or...? Can this sentence a little bit clearer? I don't know what to tell Invertzoo. Firsfron of Ronchester 16:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Hooded Merganser]] 

message: I recently went took a trip to Florida and took a couple of bird photos.  Could an expert (or at least someone who isn't a humble student like me) help me identify them?  The white bird photo was taken in Orlando and the darker bird was taken in the Everglades. Corvus coronoides talk 03:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The white bird is an American White Ibis, while the black bird is a cormorant, probably Double-crested Cormorant, though I don't have my field guide to be 100% certain. Happy New Year! Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 05:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, and Happy New Year to you as well! Corvus coronoides talk 15:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The ibis goes well with the pansies (if that's what they are).  The cormorant is a very tough one.  I'm starting to think it's a Neotropic Cormorant because of what appears to be a sharp point to the rear of the throat patch.  Anyone else?  —JerryFriedman  (Talk) 17:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... I looked again at the cormorant, but am sticking with Double-crested due to its range (Neotropic was only added to the Florida state list this year), presence of yellow on the upper beak near the eye, short tail, and generally thicker body. This has a powerpoint of how to distinguish the two species. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 19:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty convincing, especially the part about how rare they are in Florida.  The pdf was helpful too. Especially as I'm planning to be at the Bosque del Apache in a few days, where the two occur together in winter.  —JerryFriedman  (Talk) 18:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ID Requests 

message: I hadn't realized just how much of a mess the article has become recently. Huge blocks of confusing and poorly-formatted prose (albeit written by someone who clearly knows a lot about cockatiel genetics), unverified claims, repetition, possible original research regarding pet cockatiels, mostly unreferened, lacking in inline citations. It's probably easier if you take a look for yourselves. I'm not really sure where to start with the 'aviculture' section - it might as well be written in Martian as far as I'm concerned and I don't want to mess with it.
Any of you folks got a bit (okay, probably a lot) of spare time on your hands in which to work through this and get it up to scratch for the general reader? Any cockatiel breeders here? I did tag this for 'expert attention' some time ago, though it seems to have become even more bloated and muddled since then... 
Thanks. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Cockatiel]] needs urgent attention 

message: Suggested merge of The Effect of Climate Change on Bird Migration to Bird migration up for comments. Shyamal (talk) 04:07, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: Origin of birds is the Dinosaur Wikiproject's collaboration of the month. Just a heads up. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 05:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of birds 

message: 'nuff said.
Musing on a birds ashes series - 9 species which have been recorded in Australia (we've had Barn Swallow vagrants) vs. 4 UK...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ...bird ashes series tightening up looks like...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Pardon my stupidy, but what on earth are "bird ashes"? Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 00:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Ashes are a biannual cricket test series played between Australia and England. Australia has recently thrashed England quite badly, and it seems that in terms of bird FAs Australia fares better than England too. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 01:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh. Never would have guessed that. Good thing that the good old USA doesn't play, with its 10 fatured species (11 if you count William Bartram's Painted Vulture as a King Vulture) :) Thanks for the clarification. Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 01:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: hahahaha - well then there's the America's Cup...cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Be nice if America could win the America's Cup... New Zealand and Switzerland have bumped us off recently... Rufous-crowned Sparrow (talk) 02:35, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oh come on, we need a tie-breaker.... 

message: Chiffchaff is struggling a bit at FAC, any chance of someone adding a range map - beyond my competence Jimfbleak (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Threw in a bit about P. c exsul. Just a tiny bit. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a very poor range map, would still welcome a decent one Jimfbleak (talk) 08:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help 

message: Please add light to the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 January 3#Land birds. Fayenatic (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Renaming of Land Bird categories 

message: :: --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  updated --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed deletion: Manador 

message: I've been working up White-eyed River Martin with a view to sending it to GA - it has a slightly less extensive range than Barn Swallow. Any comments, additions (thanks Rufous-crowned Sparrow), editing etc would be welcome. Jimfbleak (talk) 08:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: also, this site has brilliant images of the coin - anyone know the copyright status of money images? Jimfbleak (talk) 10:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know bills are copyrighted.  I'd imagine that coins are too. MeegsC | Talk 11:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[White-eyed River Martin]] 

message: We currently have several articles on Roadrunners: Roadrunner redirects to Geococcyx, and we also have separate articles on the two species Greater Roadrunner (Geococcyx californianus or Geococcyx californiana - the articles disagree) and Lesser Roadrunner (Geococcyx velox). Roadrunner is short, Greater Roadrunner is either a long stub or a very short non-stub, and Lesser Roadrunner is a stub. 
I suggest that we merge everything into one article. -- 201.37.229.117 (talk) 13:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We generally accept that species warrant their articles unless a) the genus is monotypic or b) the species are not well-defined/there is disagreement on their status etc. Circeus (talk) 14:03, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that an article on Geococcyx is desirable. The entire batch is in need of a good overhaul though, pruning species-specific infos from the genus article and boosting the genus article with non-species-specific info. We have a paleosubspecies of the Greater ("Conkling's Roadrunner") for which I have moved some references as annotation to the appropriate species article. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 18:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles on roadrunners (''Geococcyx''): Merge?