Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 24

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25Archive 26→Archive 30

FA/GA..

I see Red-winged Blackbird is also not too far off GA (?). Jude seems to have retired, anyone else from the US keen to get it over the GA line? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

PS: I did have a sort of silly Flash mob idea, of diffusing the natural random disordered state. We have 5 Featured Articles with "Red-x" something, and another GA. Woud be rather amusing to pile on with many Red-x birds, eg Red-winged Blackbird, Red-capped Parrot, Red-backed Shrike, Red-tailed Tropicbird, Red-billed Tropicbird, Red-billed Gull, Red-footed Booby...Red-headed Honeyeater, Red Wattlebird etc. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I think a better flash mob would work the following articles up to FA; Red-footed Booby, Great Tit, Dusky Woodswallow, Booby, tit and Cock of the rock. It could be a featured topic - Birds that make Schoolboys titter. Hehe. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Aha, red-footed Booby fulfills both criteria :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
And don't forget Dickcissel and Woodpecker! :) MeegsC | Talk 08:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
And the latter's relative, the Woodcock. Once when I mentioned the Bushtit on a forum, a woman asked, "Shouldn't there be a yellow belly between the bush and the tit?"
Took me a few days to figure out the double entendre of Dusky Woodswallow....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Aberdare Cisticola?

Is this an Aberdare Cisticola? The uploader seems unsure. Richard001 (talk) 00:27, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a cisticola at all. If someone told me it was a wheatear, I wouldn't argue. Northern Wheatear? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 02:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with Jerry, definitely not a cisticola, possibly an Isabelline or Northern Wheatear? Aviceda talk 07:44, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I'd agree—definitely not a cisticola. Doesn't show much of a supercilium; possibly a female Pied Wheatear? It's an "all rights reserved" photo anyway, so it can't be uploaded to Wikipedia unless that's changed. MeegsC | Talk 17:35, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I wouldn't worry to much about it being all rights reserved. Almost everyone will change the license upon request. I've actually been so used to people accepting our conditions that I have been surprised to have a couple of rejections in the last couple of days. I'll have to compile some stats on this. As for the photo, I've posted a comment providing your responses. Richard001 (talk) 23:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Neatly getting in ahead of me. I agree that we should post comments identifying the birds when there's no id or a wrong one on the Flickr page. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

New cleanup listing

Wolterbot has delivered a new cleanup listing (or use the wikilink in our nav bar); lots of work to be done! MeegsC | Talk 16:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Image - is it a Nazca or masked booby?

The name and description of this file are in conflict with how it is being used. The image says its a masked booby, while the file is only linked on Nazca Booby. As an ornithology noob, they look pretty similar to me. I'd like to transfer it to Commons under the right name. Richard001 (talk) 08:01, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The Nazca was a split from the Masked, some old books would still say Masked, which presumably the photographer/uploader had. I don't have an ID guide but chances are it is a Nazca Booby. Sabine's Sunbird talk 08:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
As the photo was taken in the Galapagos it should be a Nazca. Grantus4504 (talk) 16:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Oh, gotcha. I have moved it to the Commons; that takes care of the booby images. Richard001 (talk) 06:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
The image now at Image:Nazca Booby (Galapagos).jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Guira to Guira Cuckoo

Could a mod move Guira to Guira Cuckoo? The placement on Guira is presumably a mistake, as no-one ever use that short form of the name in English (Guira should then be modified to a disamg. page w. Guira Cuckoo and the Güira). • Rabo³ • 18:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Done jimfbleak (talk) 05:42, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. • Rabo³ • 08:05, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

antbird... again

Just a reminder, Antbird is at FAC and could use some comments. Cheers. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:55, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

And it's through! What's next? Should I chew before I swallow? Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:06, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Fossil bird

Image:Palaeortyx.jpg: Palaeortyx skeleton, Muséum national d'histoire naturelle, Paris. A fossil bird for identification, I've seen it as "Palaeortyx" in a book, but after looking at the Ludiortyx article, seems that it could be that one too. Anyone know? It seems to be a well-known specimen. FunkMonk (talk) 15:27, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I've moved this to the bottom (where it should have been posted in the first place), so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle... MeegsC | Talk 18:31, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

another new species

The Ibis paper that had the new white-eye from the Solomons also had a new species of storm-petrel. I present the Monteiro's Storm-petrel. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

In the news

In spite of everything that is happening in Washington these days the Bar-tailed Godwit made it to one of the three lead editorials of the Washington Post today. Check out the article here, and it may be worth keeping an eye on the actual Wikipedia article today even if it isn't linked. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The Firefly Encyclopedia of Birds, which I quote so often, says Common Swifts "may well never come to land at all except when breeding; this means that some individuals will complete a nonstop flight of 500,000km (well over 300,000 miles) between fledging late one summer and their first landing at a potential nesting site two summers later!" Is anything more known now about whether this is true? Should it be mentioned, perhaps as likely but unconfirmed, at Common Swift? At Bar-tailed Godwit? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 16:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Sooty Terns apparently don't land between fledging and landing to breed two years later. The Godwit thing is I believe just the longest recorded flight. Sabine's Sunbird talk 17:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Sooty Terns don't float during that time? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 18:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I don't think so. In fact I can't say I've ever seen a tern floating on the water like a gull. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I saw the "Sooty Terns never land" thing debunked one year when a hurricane passed by New Jersey. I got my lifer Sooty Terns (2 of 'em—1 adult, 1 youngster) on the beach, standing with a bunch of Laughing Gulls and Forsters/Common Terns the day after it passed. Now, maybe they were just extra tired, but... MeegsC | Talk 19:13, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Never is a strong word, and hurricane wrecked birds hardly count. Sibely's bird behaviour book states that they occasionally land on flotsam, but on the whole they don't roost in huge numbers away from the breeding grounds - as far as is known. Like I said, no one is sure. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:19, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Prinia

What is the family to which this genus belongs ? Lacking access to the main reference I see here that it should be placed under the revised Sylviidae but the same reference Cibois et al. is being cited on WP for the placement of the genus under Cisticolidae. Shyamal (talk) 03:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

to hyphenate or not?

Monarch flycatcher or monarch-flycatcher? I ask because I am expanding paradise-flycatcher and using a hyphen for one but not the other feels odd. Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

http://www.worldbirdnames.org/n-fantails.html has it as paradise flycatcher but uses just monarch (without the flycatcher) ! I suppose there should be no hyphens in these two cases unless one insists that English names should strictly reflect taxonomic position. Shyamal (talk) 06:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
The species names for the monarch-flycatchers typically are Something Monarch or Something Flycatcher - it is only the family as a whole that is called the monarch-flycatchers - does world bird names suggest family names too? Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:33, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
The list seems to be calling the "Family Monarchidae" as "Monarchs". (Not that I favour that kind of naming though!) Shyamal (talk) 06:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I have never seen hyphens used for this combination, and for species they all seem to be merely "monarch". Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Do I need to change the paradise-flycatchers then? I'm using the HBW spelling her, which has a hyphen. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
OTOH, I always thought paradise-flycatchers had a hyphen...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Higher level taxonomy - consensus for Tropicbird placement on own order

Now, I have been reading about this - are we happy for Tropicbird to be listed as own order Phaethontiformes, and if so, presumably, that order page shoudl redirect to tropicbird? Or should is there any reason for it to be separate to Tropicbird/Phaethontidae? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I would go for the former per Christidis & Boles 2008. Maias (talk) 23:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Parrots for identification (5)

Yes, it's fine. See also this. • Rabo³ • 22:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Brotogeris cyanoptera -Ecudore-4.jpg on commons, and linked in infobox on Cobalt-winged Parakeet article. First photograph of the species on wiki. Snowman (talk) 12:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Swift Parrot. Maias (talk) 02:24, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Lathamus discolor -Antwerp Zoo-8.jpg. First still photograph of the species on wiki, there is also a video on the article page. Snowman (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Collared Lory. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Phigys solitarius -San Diego Zoo-6.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 22:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Looks bad. • Rabo³ • 17:32, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Not uploaded. Would it make a good example of a hybrid, if uploaded? ... might cause confusion. Snowman (talk) 22:33, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
To be renamed Image:Loriculus galgulus (juvenile) -Singapore-6a.jpg - renaming on commons underway. Snowman (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 22:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
#49-52 are all fine, the only minor issue being that #50 is a juvenile (not a female as claimed). Speaking of this genus, if you plan on doing anything regarding the taxonomy of this group, you should be aware of this paper (PDF). Regarding #48 - yes, perhaps it could be of some use, though I'm not entirely sure which species are involved (I suspect a Mealy might be one of the parents, but as for its partner?) • Rabo³ • 21:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
I thought so, the adult Loriculus galgulus have black beaks, and the parrot in #50 has a yellowish beak. Snowman (talk) 21:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Psittrichas fulgidus -Jurong BirdPark-6.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Wheatear images

I've got some doubt about a couple of wheatear images but was reluctant to edit or delete them before getting expert opinion (Rasmus (Rabo3?) are you reading?) I believe the recently uploaded Pied Wheatear is probably Hooded and the image on the Hooded Wheatear taxobox is O. leucopyga Aviceda talk 02:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Re Pied. I think this is probably a first summer Pied. Back is brown and the black throat doesn't extend into the breast. Also Pied breeds in Bulgaria (where the photo was taken) whereas the Hooded is a Middle East bird. Any other opinions? Grantus4504 (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Re Hooded. Definitely O. leucopyga - the owner of the image identifies it as White-crowned Wheatear (I've fixed this)Grantus4504 (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

FA/GA redux

Well folks, down to the business end of the year and the $64 question is whether we'll get 50 FAs and GAs each (unlikely but 50 FAs would be a great milestone). Some articles which are within striking distance of GA are Red-winged Blackbird, Australian Magpie (which I am working on), Red-capped Robin (ditto), Great Frigatebird, King Penguin, Indigo Bunting, Jackdaw, Ara (genus), and, well, probably some others. The hardest thing is citing material for comprehensiveness. If anyone has seen any others which are close, list them here. If anyone feels reasonably confident that any are GA-worthy, then feel free to nominate and let us know here.

I will probably push on with Australian Magpie and Red-capped Robin for FAC before the end of the year. Jim said much of Greater Crested Tern holds true for Sandwich Tern. All/any hands on deck (?). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Wellllllllll..... I could try something. But Nanowrimo is but a week away. And if you check my editing history, that is always my weakest month of the year. I can probably GA either Swallow or Trogon by then though. Or even Great Frigatebird, since I started it. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:00, 22 October 2008 (UTC) EDIT: Actually, my HBW Volume 13 arrives soon. And when it does, I think the article I most need to push is.... sunbird. For obvious reasons. ;) Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Great Auk has been mentioned, as a GA possible. Snowman (talk) 09:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
I hope to get Red-throated Diver and Bird nest—and maybe even List of birds of Madagascar—to at least GA by year's end... MeegsC | Talk 10:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Good - I have updated the list here of things which may be not too far off Recognised content of some sort. Feel free to add anything which looks really promising. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

PS: I did the last couple of tiny things Jim noted for the GAN for Indigo Bunting, this one should be a shoo-in so I renominated it there. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

PPS: While waiting, can anyone add their 2c on what Ara (genus) needs before going to GAN? All eyes welcome. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Not yet near GA, but I have tried improving some locals. Indian Pitta, Indian Robin, Red-whiskered Bulbul, Red-vented Bulbul, Black Drongo, Yellow-wattled Lapwing & Red-wattled Lapwing. Shyamal (talk) 15:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Aha, some good remedies to the first-world anglophone bias we have :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:38, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
Indigo Bunting has reached the way-point of GA now, and there are alot of helpful comments at Ara (genus), a topic I know little about, erm, what do folks feel is the next closest to GA (all those who can't chip in on Ara)...Anyone wanna offer Meegs some advice on what Red-throated Diver might need? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
To be honest the points I was going to make were already in the to do list - voice and distribution are simply too light at this point. Otherwise looks good. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Duh. That'll teach me not to look more closely. Dunno how I missed that. Yeah, I'd agree with all them, so tehre is a nice 'roadmap to GA' there. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

<--(outdent) Seems to me we should be able to get this month's collaboration article Penguin to GA without too much fuss. Casliber, want to cast an eye over it and list what you think needs doing? A preliminary (and fairly cursory look) seems to point at lack of references as being the major issue... MeegsC | Talk 10:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I was planning on picking up a book or two from the library for this one; can't hurt to have a look I guess....ok then...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:42, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration voting extended by 3 days then...

OK, I just moved the expired noms, leaving Birdwatching and Acorn Woodpecker (that one is just teetering on expired but I didn't want to wipe everything). Anyway, we have a tie so will leave it open for 3 days. Have a think on something big which may benefit from a few sets of eyes for a month or whatever. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, Penguin is the october/november collaboration so have at it. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Very interesting. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Another Flickr treasure tove.

We're being spoiled I'm dure, but I have found another photographer with a wealth of new species (at least what I've seen has many new ones) here. He seems to like hornbills, which to my mind is an acceptable weakness in life. Bt among his images is the first free image of the Bugun Liocichla [1]! Sabine's Sunbird talk 08:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The Bugun Liocichla photo has a copyright on it and is possibly not owned by the uploader. The good news however is that I happen to know the discoverer-describer of the Bugun Liocichla and in principle he has mentioned his willingness to share the photos of the holotype, but he has been busy and I have not been persistent enough. Shyamal (talk) 08:45, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
I hadn't noticed that. But at least there are other images of value (like a parrotbill, I don't think we have any of those). Sabine's Sunbird talk 09:14, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
There should be some mention of Flickr in the newsletter I think. I have got one of an Abbott's Babbler, and the person who released it might be willing to do the same for others. Richard001 (talk) 08:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I'll put a mention in November's newsletter... MeegsC | Talk 08:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, nix this guy for the moment. He has a whole raft of images in his hornbill set that are not his. I will message him na dask him if the other images are his, but for the moment don't upload any of his. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Birds for identification (2)

Roadrunner? Aviceda talk 10:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I do not known what it is. Snowman (talk) 14:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd say Greater Roadrunner, but I'm a Brit. jimfbleak (talk) 17:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Greater. A lesser would have a white throat and buff undersides. Possibly a young or female based on the lack of colour around the eye but don't quote me on that. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Geococcyx californianus -Binghamton Zoo-6.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 10:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Great photo. Not good on ducks, have to duck out now for saturday chores. will look later if no-one else does.Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Drake Ringed Teal several good images on Commons jimfbleak (talk) 06:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks like a match to the commons images. Uploaded to Image:Callonetta leucophrys -London Wetland Centre.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 09:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
There are lots of hybrids ducks around big cities (so I tend to give them a wide-berth!) but this could be a Ferruginous Duck (Aythya nyroca) Aviceda talk 10:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Colour is right for Ferruginous, if accurate, but eye colour, bill pattern and a vent area that isn't solidly white make me dubious. Eye should be white (m) or brown (f). If the colour is too orange, shape and eye colour suggest juvenile Greater Scaup jimfbleak (talk) 10:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Not uploaded. Snowman (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Ingrid's ID seems close to spot on to me, the first gulls are Ring-billed but I'm not sure on the ones on page 4 (Herring?) Got to page 6 and saw that there were 30 more pages and gave up. Aviceda talk 10:28, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Def an adult non-breeding Marbled Godwit. Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Marbled Godwit (Limosa fedoa) -8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Are we sure it's a nighthawk? The photographer identified this Red-shouldered Hawk as a "Redtail Hawk". But if it is, and if those are juvenile feathers coming in, Sibley shows only the juvenile Common Nighthawk as having rufous on the body; Lesser is all "sandy gray". It's also conceivable that the two species breed at different times in that part of the world, so if somebody has good life-history information, we might be able to identify it from the date. (If it's worth that much work.) —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Rufous, or brown, or whatever color they are. It's not easy being a deuteranomalous birder. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Female Fan-tailed Widowbird? [2] and [3] are somewhat similar, and this one is extremely similar and taken in the same place. Zimmerman, Turner, and Pearson note, "Male Hartlaub's Marsh Widowbird has much longer tail; other female-plumaged Euplectes lack orange or russet on wing-coverts." I didn't see any weavers, sparrows, etc. in ZTP with those wing patches. The subspecies of the Fan-tailed Widowbird found in the Crater Highlands is Euplectes axillaris phoeniceus. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, the photographer now agrees. Anyone else pro or con? If not, I'll upload it in a few days. ZTP is searchable at Amazon, by the way. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 21:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
I say go for it. Good to have another species. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Lovebird uploaded to Image:Agapornis fischeri -Serengeti National Park-4.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Verreaux's Eagle-owl. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:04, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Bubo lacteus -Atlanta Zoo-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Crested Pigeon. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Ocyphaps lophotes -Australia-6.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 19:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks a lot like Von der Decken's Hornbill, but I'm not sure.
Uploaded to Image:Tockus deckeni (Male) -Antwerp Zoo-8.jpg. Snowman (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
There's been a mix-up—that link is the colorful (Swift?) parrot again. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 16:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Error in the external link of bird 17, so I have unlinked it to reduce confusion; see 17a:
Swainson's Toucan uploaded to Image:Ramphastos swainsonii -Antwerp Zoo-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
African Grey Hornbill Tockus nasutus ? Aviceda talk 02:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Not an African Grey Hornbill. Snowman (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Von der Decken's Hornbill uploaded to Image:Tockus deckeni (female) -Antwerp Zoo-8.jpg. Snowman (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Black-headed Heron? Grantus4504 (talk) 11:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
I'm convinced. See this field-guide plate. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 23:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Image:Ardea melanocephala2.jpg and added to article. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 22:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Guira. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to Image:Guira Cuckoo (Guira guira) -Isle of Wight-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 22:28, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
#21: I did the edit to the description where the ID was changed to female Aceros undulatus. • Rabo³ • 21:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Renaming to Image:Aceros undulatus (female) -Aviafauna-6.jpg underway on commons, which might take several days. Snowman (talk) 22:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Missed the other hornbills where there still were some doubts: Both #16 and 18 are Von der Decken's Hornbill. The first a male, second a female. Yes, #17a is a Swainson's. • Rabo³ • 14:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

subspecies listing

Do we have any policy on listing subspecies (along with their ranges and appearance) for species multiple subspecies? I think the record is the Golden Whistler with 59, but I am considering doing the Great Tit as my next FA (easier than another family) and it has 34, which is still a hell of a lot. For these multiple subspecies species would it be better to have a subarticle? Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

How about the Polynesian Triller? I've put a couple of the Fijian ones there, but Collared Kingfisher would be one of the biggest challenges! Aviceda talk 06:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, lets not have a dick-waving contest about who's species has the most subspecies! :P Let us just say there are a few species (which are often distributed around the Australasian/Pacific region) which have lots of subspecies. What do we do? Sabine's Sunbird talk 06:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Take your point, thought I might point out a couple more worth mentioning, certainly feel like it might be worth a subarticle....would you use a 'tabular' format? Aviceda talk
And then there is Rainbow Lorikeet, where many of the subspecies are very distinctive with their own common names etc. My guess would be to just start doing the article and see how it pans out. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
If people want to, I'd suggest going ahead with the subspecies lists (they can certainly be useful). Articles for the individual subspecies may be a good idea at some point, but right now there are numerous species that lack even a basic article (except for the standard - more or less accurate - lines posted by the starting bot based on IUCN), so I certainly don't intend spending any amount of time writing pages for subspecies. Furthermore, there are few cases where there actually is enough info to fill a subspecies page (at least unless you just want to copy most of the info already found in the species article). Casliber, the Rainbow Lorikeet article should arguably be split up into the species mentioned in the brief text below the subspecies list, as a growing number of authorities have accepted the split of these. I think the Clements list is pretty much the only one still going with a single species. • Rabo³ • 09:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
I have Christidis and Boles 2008 Systemaitcs and taxonomy of Australian Birds which cites several papers argungi for a split and proposes that it is reasonable without actually splitting (but then again there are only 3 ssp in Oz). This is fascinating news, is there an authorative list with the split? I guess we should take thsi to Rainbow Lorikeet talk page....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:21, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
On the Australian Ringneck article the subspecies details are listed in a table. Snowman (talk) 18:54, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Casliber, I have copied part of my earlier comment, your comment and added a new reply to the talk page for the Rainbow Lorikeet (I hope you don't mind me copying your comment, but a wiki-link back to this talk will go dead as soon as it is achieved). • Rabo³ • 22:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Good idea. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Lead of Modern birds is extremely misleading

Neornithes redirects to Modern birds. The lead of that article currently reads

"Modern birds (subclass Neornithes) are the members of class Aves that have survived into recent times and have coexisted with humans."

This is extremely misleading.

From Bird:

"Containing all modern birds, the subclass Neornithes is, due to the discovery of Vegavis, now known to have evolved into some basic lineages by the end of the Cretaceous"

- i.e., more than 65 million years ago. Many, many (perhaps most) genera of Neornithes did not survive into recent times and did not coexist with humans.

I suggest that Neornithes be re-characterized in the lead. It would be fine to say "including those genera which have survived into recent times and have coexisted with humans", but we should make it clear that this has nothing to do with the definition of Neornithes. Alternatively, we may want two different articles for two different possible meanings of the expression "Modern birds": One for the meaning "Neornithes", and the other "birds contemporaneous with humans". -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 18:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your changes, the lead is misleading. I never even knew this was an article, incidentally. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Could somebody please fix this in Modern birds?? I'm not an ornithologist or a member of this project, and I don't want to step on any toes, but I think that this needs to be done. Thanks. -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 11:56, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Taxonomic and nomenclatural information in bird articles

For a while now, I've been thinking about whether it's possible to produce some kind of standardised way of including information about alternative taxonomic treatments and alternative English names in bird articles. The taxobox template doesn't really provide much support for this - scientific name synonyms being about all it can cope with. Over at the Red-flanked Bluetail article, I've thrown together a first attempt, and I' like to throw it open for discussion. Some questions you might want to think about:

  • is this at all useful?
  • is a tabular format the right approach? should there be more text?
  • is the abbreviated naming of works and referencing style appropriate?
  • is it sensible to include nomenclatural and taxonomic information in the same table?
  • is the range of works cited appropriate for this example species?

Over to you. SP-KP (talk) 23:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

There is no easy way to do this, but I can see some unnecessary duplication in the table. Converting it to prose allows for discussion and explanation, common names can be listed in a separate parapgraph and sicentific names also, generally there are only a maximum of 2 (or 3 in complicated cases) of currently accepted scientific names. Here is what I did at a mushroom - Entoloma sinuatum. I must have doen a bird one somewhere but can't recall o0ff the top of my head. Australian Magpie will need some work and I am working it up at present as there is some conflict over generic name, and it has been 1-3 species in the past. Synonyms are easily listed in taxobox. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
There is an example of alternative name usage at the OBC Images website (...and a future reference?) Aviceda talk 03:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
The synonyms are not always merely synonyms - they are other names that have been used and the circumscriptions have changed. And the logic behind these changes cannot easily be captured in a standard way. Have seen complicated Venn diagrams attempting to provide standard ways of displaying these but nothing can really solve the species problem. Shyamal (talk) 04:42, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

For the same bird Avibase has a slightly different treatment you may want to consider {http://www.bsc-eoc.org/avibase/species.jsp?lang=EN&id=F7C682E1EF452079&ts=1225551338150&sec=summary] (Lipkee (talk) 14:58, 1 November 2008 (UTC))

Alternative names, when used to some extend, are useful. Nevertheless, some alternative names listed both on orientalbirdimages and bsc (links above) are essentially never used, but made their way into those lists because some book published 80 years ago used that name. So I'd recommend staying away from those as they really add nothing of value to the articles (i.e. limit it to names actually used with some frequency). Specifically regarding the Red-flanked Bluetail, I do think the table is of some use, though the duplicate issue (mentioned by Casliber) could be dealt with by combining the authorities that used the same names and taxonomy (e.g. Howard & Moore, BWP, IOC and Clements could be combined instead of having four separate entries) • Rabo³ • 03:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the comments; I'd like to respond to two of them.

  • Duplication - there is a specific reason for not combining entries. I wanted to enable readers to sort the table by both name and work, and I couldn't see a way of combining entries and still allow them to do the latter. For a smallish table like this one, maybe the ability to sort by work is a nice-to-have, but for a species covered in many more works (Common Blackbird or Herring Gull, say) the table could be quite long. This raises another question, of course, but I'll leave that to one side for now
  • Prose vs Table - I agree that prose should be the primary means of explaining the different namings and taxonomic treatments; the table is intended to be a kind of quick reference only, not a supplement for well-written prose

SP-KP (talk) 19:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

IUCN updated their page, which has resulted in a new name for most (if not all) their species pages. IUCN links are present in virtually all bird species articles and a fair percentage of articles for other vertebrate taxa. I presume the link updates is a job for a bot, but am wondering where a request of that nature should be placed (or will the update eventually happen automatically)? • Rabo³ • 17:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC) [The IUCN links still don't work so I guess it's a permanent move of the pages.] • Rabo³ • 21:34, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I noticed this too at the Commons. Richard001 (talk) 10:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Yep, it's their new database, front end and everything for the 2008 list. All(?) birds have been reviewed again. So we actually need to change Redlist date, review date and retrieval date to 2008, in addition to the number. The taxa with status changes in the last 2 years have been updated already, except for the number. They might only have the BirdLife update sheet, not the IUCN Redlist entry sourced.
I noted that bird numbers now generally are 14XXXX. That also fits with ~10000 bird taxa in the IUCN DB. Whereas formerly it could be everything. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 02:06, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK

I have added an image and some extra text to the article on Newton's Parakeet. It might make a DYK on any one of several interesting DYK points, after some more additions and refs. I am not exactly sure what the parameters for a DYK are. Snowman (talk) 20:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Given it is not a new article, it needs to have undergone a five-fold expansion. The readable prose size was 1672 B (287 words), just before your expansion. At present it is 3044 B (532 words) - it would need to double in size again unfortunately. A rough guide I find is to limit possible candidates to those stubs of around 150 words readable prose or less, unless it is a very notable species, as 5 days can be a challenge to process a larger amount of info. Getting and using monobook and getting the page-size tool is very handy for this (beats cutting and pasting into a Word document anyday). I will just get the links. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

This is the script importScript('User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js'); //[[User:Dr_pda/prosesize.js]] and you will see the 'page size' tool in the toolbox. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The readability tool will also give a word count. Snowman (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
I think it is going to be difficult to expand the article five fold, and so it looks like this will not become of TYK. There are many other stubs. Snowman (talk) 20:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
As I have Forshaw's Parrots of the World, it is pretty easy to expand any parrot stubs five-fold. In general, biology articles are underrepresented at DYK and are sought after to be put in. I try and sprinkle a few in here and there. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Do you have the recent review from Zootaxa? I would not trust it 100% (a few things seemed strange but I could not check them yet), but it is the prime source of info you'll get these days. Greenway and that Mascarenes bird monograph from the ?1980s? (Cheke? Or Cheke in Whoever?) ought to have some quality info too. Leguat and other old sources are freely online, and they ought to get you half way. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 01:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Some images on Flickr - anyone want to have a browse?

A Flickr user has offered to change the license on any images we want for WP.

As you are on to Indonesian birds you may find these of interest:

Does anyone want to have a look through them for photos that would be particularly useful? Any of species we have no photos of, only inferior quality ones, or pictures showing unique behaviours etc are all good. I'm happy to transfer any and tidy them up (categories etc). Richard001 (talk) 23:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes please! [4] and [5] and [6] and [7] and [8] for starter for ten. We have massive, I mean massive gaps in our New Guinea bird images. Same with Sulawesi. Also This trogon would be awesome for the trogon article (recent split). But yeah, want want want. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Other island species we don't yet have images of [9], [10], [11] (we don't have a picture of a wild one), [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18] (no adults phots), [19]. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:52, 15 October 2008 (UTC) EDIT This one Isn't an island species but we don't have it either. Or this one [20] Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:40, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
This is terrific news, we have a strong anglophone bias (naughty us), so this goes some way to addressing this. Much material on these birds on the net is meagre too, so is a big net positive to develop some articles. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:47, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
PS/FWIW, Golden Monarch and Hooded Butcherbird would be straightforward DYKs, and that is an amazing eagle picture! Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
So would the treeswift and the trogon. Also, can I have this one? [21]. It shows the sexual dimorphism of trogons! Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Isn't the noncommercial a problem? If I remember right, wiki can only use photos that also are allowed for commercial. In any case, several of the photos are all rights reserved, so we certainly can't go there (e.g. [22], [23] and [24]) • Rabo³ • 12:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Clearly, I should read the full message before replying. If he's willing to change them to a copyright compatible with wiki - great. • Rabo³ • 12:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, he's changed most of them, and I've uploaded a few. I'll do the rest tomorrow. But it is awesome, we just got out first Biak endemic (the long-tailed starling)! Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
These can be helpful too:
The Sulawesi Hanging Parrot please: [25] and [26]. Snowman (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
See parrot 51 above; to confirm identification. Snowman (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. First photograph of species on wiki. Snowman (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
The Knobbed Hornbill please: [27] and [28]. Snowman (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
First one uploaded. Snowman (talk) 19:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Other parrots by the same flickr photographer - new to wiki or to enhance commons collection:
Vernal Hanging-Parrot, [29]. Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
See parrot 52 above; to confirm identification. Snowman (talk) 10:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. First photograph of species on wiki. Snowman (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Blue-crowned Hanging-parrot [30], [31], [32], [33] Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
All uploaded. Snowman (talk) 19:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
See parrot 50 for identification above - are some of the Blue-crowned Hanging-parrots labeled "female" actually juvenile? Snowman (talk) 09:26, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Identified as juvenile and not female as indicated on flickr. Adults have black beaks. (see parrot 50 above). Snowman (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
Red-breasted Parakeet [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Three uploaded. There may have been an automatic uploading software error with the other two. Snowman (talk) 19:23, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Long-tailed Parakeet [39], [40], [41], [42]. Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
All uploaded, if upload software worked. Snowman (talk) 19:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Monk Parakeet [43] (nice photograph of a common parrot). Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. Snowman (talk) 19:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Yellow-throated Hanging-parrot [44], [45]. Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. Snowman (talk) 20:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Malabar Parakeet [46], [47], [48] Snowman (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. Snowman (talk) 20:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
Plum-headed Parakeet [49] Snowman (talk) 19:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded. Snowman (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

We should focus on ones we need before trying to enhance already covered species. We don't want to be too greedy. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

As stated at the top of this section the offer is "A Flickr user has offered to change the license on any images we want for WP". This offer is a good opportunity to upload more photographs and I think we should make the best of it that we can. I have indicated photographs that I think are needed and will be helpful to the wiki in the areas I am interested in, so please rethink your comment about being greedy, and I do not know why you have low expectations. Please do not question the generosity of the flickr photographer in this way. Snowman (talk) 21:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't questioning his generosity, I just don't want to sour him by making too many demands. But whatever. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
If needed, I am happy to assist with the uploading work of any parrot or hornbill listed here to help the flickr photographer provide as many good illustrations to the wiki (and commons) as possible. Snowman (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, we're now contacts on Flickr and he's told me that he plans to most if not all images to Wiki-friendly licences, so looks like I was sweating over nothing. Not to mention spectacular news. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Requesting hornbills from flickr:

All above hornbill flickr images uploaded to commons, and several used in en wiki articles. Snowman (talk) 10:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

And a few non-hornbill/parrots would be awesome...

Requesting parrots and others from flickr:

Uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Snowman, Turquoise Parrot --> Rueppell's Griffon Vulture are fine. I'm not sure about the tarsier, but yes, based on locality I guess it's a Spectral. The taxonomy of that group is a complete mess (see Tarsier#Classification). I'm not sure what #21 you referred to on my talk page - isn't that the hornbill is commented on earlier ([83])? • Rabo³ • 19:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Whoops, my mistake; I meant bird 20 - the one above the hornbill. Snowman (talk) 20:24, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Sabines Sunbird is right about 20; Guira Cuckoo. • Rabo³ • 03:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Turquoise Parrot --> Rueppell's Griffon Vulture are all uploaded to commons. Do the page names use the German version, "Rüppell's Vulture", or the English version, "Rueppell's Vulture". Snowman (talk) 20:58, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
HBW and a wide range of other English sources use actual spelling with the umlaut. I don't see any reason to deviate from that (though if commons uses the version w/o umlaut I wouldn't consider it important enough to actually change it there - as long as both versions link to the page). • Rabo³ • 02:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Birds/Archive_24&oldid=417202626"