Talk:Sun conure

message: The last sentence says that these birds will attack strangers. I find this highly suspicious, considering the fact that parrots are generally shy around strangers, unless the person is sticking their fingers in the cage or something--in which case this is not "attacking," as they are merely defending their home from an intruder (how would you feel if some weirdo ten times your size started sticking their fingers in through the windows of your home?). Request verification or deletion. 71.217.114.221 02:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My sun conure attacks strangers near his cage, or if they try to pet him.  He tries to attack me if I stick my hand in his cage too though, or try to pick him up off of anything higher than about waist level with my bare hands.  Cage territorialism, height complexes, and hostility towards stangers/flocking are common with many species of parrots though, cannot say if suns are more so than usual.  --71.192.117.127 22:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

text: My bird Sunny also confirms this. She acts aggressively towards strangers, especially women. --Spcleddy (talk) 06:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

text: My Sun Conure will attack strangers if they are in my home and she is out of her cage.  If she is in her cage she will become loud and agressive.  From what I've been told she is "bonded" to me and this is why she does this.  When she was in the pet store she was friendly to everyone but now she's very possesive of me and my girlfriend.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.217.87.60 (talk) 04:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attacking? 

message: article very unbalanced. Needs description/habitat etc. cheers,  Casliber | talk  |  contribs 03:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: unbalanced

message: I have started a new section because discussion on the name of this page may not have been completed prior to its rather abrupt closure this morning. Snowman (talk) 11:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion had been open for 3 weeks, and there had been no further comments in the past 4 days.  I am unsure what other points needed to be made. Neıl ☎ 11:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For example: one user said that he was going to be busy for a few weeks and wanted to contribute further. I thinik that your closure summary in incomplete as you have not indicated what weight you put the web-search results in your closure summary, which was a key point of the discussion. You have not given any chance for anyone to discuss your conclusions, before you rather abruptly closed a complicated discussion. Snowman (talk) 11:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I valued the IUCN argument above any based on Google hitcounts, which are usually skewed in favour of a) the western world and b) popular culture, and can be interpreted in multiple ways.  Everybody made good arguments, and in that case it often comes down to a headcount, and it was 5-2 in favour of Parakeet (it is perhaps telling that the article was using pipelinks such as Jandaya Conure).  If you really really want to re-open the discussion, then you can do so below - nobody's stopping you. Neıl ☎ 11:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect that the headcount is skewed in favour of IUCN names because the previous administrator, who was conscientiously following and taking part in the discussion, left a notice at WP:Bird asking for their opinions, but they say that Conure is the name that most people know this bird by. Anyway, I think that the headcount is not totally reliable here. I guess that the pipe links may reflect page name changes on several pages over time, and attempts to dab the links. It there a formal way to reopen discussion?  I have started this section, as indicated at the top of the closure box, which re-opens the discussion, so that anyone can contribute further, if they wish to. Snowman (talk) 12:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no formal way I'm aware of.  You can note it at Wikipedia:Requested moves, and perhaps a note on the talk pages of all those who participated above.  As GTBacchus was taking part in the discussion, he would usually refrain from closing it - a previously uninvolved administrator is usually expected to do so to ensure neutrality and proprietry.  His actions in notifying WP:BIRD were also appropriate - asking the relevant Wikiproject(s) for their feedback is normal. Neıl ☎ 12:35, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just curious, Snowman—why is the headcount "not totally reliable"? And where did WP:BIRD respond that Conure is the name most people know the bird by? MeegsC | Talk 13:39, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Neil, I do not know how to interpret your initial edit summary, which was "Hm". More importantly, would you check your headcount?  My understanding is that; the previous administrator did not come to a decision; one user did not clearly express an opinion on the page name, but commented technical issues of a cut and paste; one users view was canvassed from WB:Birds. Without these the count becomes 2:2.  In addition, the previous administrator did not move the page, and he did make a point of this. The previous administrator indicated that an extremely high web-search ratio would be significant, and the discussion suggests that one interpretation of the web-count is that it is significant. Snowman (talk) 13:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: MeegsC, this is what you said: Far more people will have interacted with this species in a cage than they will have in the wild, unfortunately. And the websites aimed towards people who keep them in cages will always far outnumber the websites aimed at people who are interested in their existence in the wild. Snowman (talk) 13:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Judging by above, we have 4 for parakeet and 2 (me and snowman) for Conure. Though I am unhappy with the decision -mainly as I think of parakeets as Australian and in every zoo or book I have these things are called Conures, and Parakeet is a really blunt term to use, and I still don't know the background behind all this - this is the AOU which promoted 'Parrot' for 'Amazon' as well - I'll concede and let it drop as there is a majority and IUCN on one side  -not exactly consensus and not exactly a large number of people but participation at the moment on these type of things is not huge. cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Caiques are called parrots as well. I'll reluctantly concede for similar reasons. I was hoping that you would comment, and complete your dialog, cheers. Snowman (talk) 14:08, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry that this move has left some feeling unhappy—it's an unfortunate side effect of "majority voting"! :P Casliber, if it makes you feel better, the term parakeet is most definitely not restricted to Australia, and I have dozens of books containing references to Central and South American parakeets.  And some of them were even written by non-Americans! : )MeegsC | Talk 15:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries - I am not from that part of the world so I recognise my familiarity is less than others. feelings? more like when your sporting team loses.....cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Consensus can change (WP:CCC). Snowman (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of page 

message: # As nominator. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 05:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: #Strongly. Avicultural names are generally restricted to the avicultural community, whereas the IOC names are the ones that should and increasingly are used by the more reputable scientific authorities and the conservation organisations. Excpetions to the IOC naming rules should be for species that are well known outside the combined fields of biology and aviculture, not to pander to the specialist interests of one group of hobbyists. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 05:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds link you are neutral on the page move. Snowman (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose

message: :Uncontested moves in the past because I was never aware of them. Oh, and this line is rich the by far most widely-used descriptive term for a bird which is now far more common as a captive-bred aviary bird or companion parrot than it is as a wild species.  Sabine's Sunbird  talk 05:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's not mine! :) I don't own, nor have I ever owned an Aratinga solstitialis. It's just a statement of 'it is what it is'. If the admittedly disagreeable circumstances dictate that people are more likely to encounter a 'Sun Conure' in a cage or aviary than a 'Sun Parakeet' in the wilds of Guyana and Brazil, then I believe that this is the reality that we should be delivering to our readers. Your views may differ. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 05:41, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It would do the people (and I have to resist the temptation to use a stronger term) who keep the poor things in cages good to know that their precious pets are stolen wild animals. But my point is that the status of these birds as pets is only one aspect of the totality of the bird.; they are only called Sun Conures when they are in cages, but this article is not about just the birds in cages but the whole species. The whole species is Sun Parakeet - known as Sun Conure when in captivity. The article should be named for the species, not just the ones unfortunate enough to be pets. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 05:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd disagree with your statement that pet Sun Conures/Parakeets are 'stolen wild animals'. The vast majority of the birds you'd see in pet stores and people's homes nowadays are no more South American than you (presuming that you're not S. American) or I. They're bred - and as I understand it, they breed rather prolifically, over here (wherever your local 'here' is), raised alongside humans or sometimes even from the egg (which, for the record, is not something I approve of, as it often leads to *really* screwed up, maladjusted and confused little birds) - by humans. Your typical pet Aratinga solstitialis is no more a wild parrot, in the "could survive on it's own if released" sense than a captive-bred Budgerigar, Lovebird or Cockatiel - the only difference being that pet Aratinga solstitialis are several generations lesser removed from wild stock. It's even getting to the stage that the breeders are producing colour mutations now - again, not something that I approve of, but it is an indicator of how far along in the process of domestication that the Aratinga solstitialis is coming... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 06:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The trade is ongoing. The species has been wiped out in Guyana and now trappers are moving into Brazil to get them. So yeah, some of these birds may be bred in aviculture (and hybridised with other species) but there are clearly still wild birds being removed from the wild. And it's only going to get worse - nothing makes a parrot more valuable than rarity. But whatever, this isn't relevant to the discussion about whether we should move this. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 06:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: It is the rule in bird world to Capitalize Names, because names are considered proper nouns. However, a name is only a proper noun  when it is the official name, and sun conure is not an official name. Therefore, it should be moved to sun conure to reflect that it is a common noun and not a proper noun. -- Kim van der Linde at venus 19:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh Kim you're so cheeky :) I will upload some photos of aussie sundews then...Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization: "Sun Parakeet" and "sun conure"

message: On the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Parakeet there is a problem I noticed: there is text in a box early in the article that starts with "Adults have a rich yellow crown" and goes on, but it is horizontal and not vertically aligned with the rest of the article. It is very hard to read that way.
75.139.84.11 (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out. Someone had added an extra space at the beginning of the paragraph and screwed up the formatting. Fixed. :) --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coding problems 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus the proposed name is the WP:COMMONNAME. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 12:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sun parakeet →  – This may be a controversial one too. I've read the previous move discussions and I saw the arguments - but it's been a few years now, it seems. I would suggest moving this, per WP:COMMONNAME. The sun conure is a VERY popular pet parrot, perhaps in the top 5 of most ubiquitous companion parrots (behind the budgerigar and cockatiel and alongside the rosy-faced lovebird and ring-necked parakeet). A Google search tells me that sun conure has 1,890,000 results, while sun parakeet has 104,000 results. If we look at Google Scholar, it's a similar story. Sun conure has 417 hits, while sun parakeet has 146. If we look at the sun parakeet article, it also mentions that ornithological authorities Thomas Arndt and Joseph Forshaw also refer to this species as the "sun conure" and that this is the only species of "conure" that is regularly referred to as such in ornithological circles; most others are called "parakeets" by authorities. I'm aware that Wikipedia typically likes to use the International Ornithologists' Union names, but this one to me would seem like a notable exception. Can we make it one, for the sake of clarity? Iloveparrots (talk) 21:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

text: See also the page move for the turquoise-fronted Amazon I started today, for similar reasons. Iloveparrots (talk) 21:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

text: It just seems really odd to me that we have a more widely-used name for this species (by far) that we can't use because of a decision by a few people on a Wikiproject several years ago - a vote that involved 12 people in total. It's mentioned up-page that even zoos call this bird "sun conure". A quick search for "sun conure" zoo would suggest that this is indeed the case. Does the WP:BIRDS agreement supersede Wikipedia:Official names? Iloveparrots (talk) 19:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Will also add that the World Parrot Trust uses "sun conure". Iloveparrots (talk) 21:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: COMMONNAME isn't the only thing to consider for article titles. Following a single source such as IOC allows us to meet the WP:CONSISTENT article title criterion. American robin and European robin are most commonly referred to simply as "robin". Adding American/European may be a reasonable way to disambiguate, but it isn't how people commonly refer to them in conversation. Plantdrew (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a good comparison. We aren't deciding whether to disambiguate here. Invasive Spices (talk) 18:06, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Birds has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject South America has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Venezuela has been notified of this discussion. UtherSRG (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 27 June 2023 

message: This is an unsourced statement that seems dubious to me. At that age, they're definitely still juveniles and barely independent from their parents. Should that read "years", perhaps? Iloveparrots (talk) 09:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Young sun conures form monogamous pairs around 4 to 5 months of age"?