Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 23

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

→

Archive 30

Can someone help with access to "Obituary Robert Cecil Beavan. Ibis 1870:301-302". This would help settle some confusion on the species authority for Centropus andamanensis. (more on User_talk:Shyamal#Beavan_again). Shyamal (talk) 11:22, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

The obituary is very brief, I think that most of the point are covered in the Beavan article. Beavan published seven articles in Ibis. (This might be an advert so remove if you like: Membership of BOU is £35/year and you get access to all 150 years of Ibis online.) Grantus4504 (talk) 06:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Dr Alan Peterson communicated to me by email that Beavan's fish book of 1877 (posthumous but not indicated in the book) is attributed to a Reginald C. Beavan who it turns out was the brother of Robert Cecil Beavan. The AMNH probably expanded the initial "R" based on zoonomen.net that Dr Peterson curates (the book itself is available on www.archive.org and there is no mention of Lt. Reginald but it only indicates Capt. R C. Beavan). Thanks to all this research, Centropus andamanensis should be attributed to Robert Cecil Beavan (more correctly perhaps as "Tytler in Beavan, 1867" - but not confident of the full implications of the many ICZN sub clauses !) In any case I think this is also a case for editors to indicate their real names on their pages just so that any credits in formal publications are made appropriately. Many thanks to Grantus and Smallweed all the same. Shyamal (talk) 06:29, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The binomial name of White-crested Hornbill (Tropicranus albocristatus) is different on the Hornbill page about the family. Can someone with an up-to-date book check this please. Snowman (talk) 09:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Careful here, there is an asian species White-crowned Hornbill (Aceros comatus) and I think the images on the page are this species, not the African one (Tropicranus albocristatus). Aviceda talk 10:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I've attached a poor image of W-Crested H Image:White-crested Hornbill ug dec05.jpg at Semuliki NP, W. Uganda. Aviceda talk 10:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Colour me impressed. Semiliki is a pretty hardcore National park to visit. Sabine's Sunbird talk 10:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Is it Tockus albocristatus or Tropicranus albocristatus for the African one? According the the French wiki Tropicranus albocristatus has three subspecies, so they may have different appearances, and your image may not be typical of the other two subspecies. Snowman (talk) 12:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Hornbills for identification:

• 6a. Image:Tropicranus albocristatus -Central Park Zoo-6a.jpg at Central Park Zoo, USA. Snowman (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• 6. Image:Tropicranus albocristatus -Central Park Zoo-6.jpg at Central Park Zoo, USA. Snowman (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
• 7. Image:White-crowned Hornbill (Aceros comatus) -pair-6a.jpg at a bird park in Singapore. Snowman (talk) 11:10, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I have found a listing here of birds in some zoos. Central Park Zoo have one male Berenicornis albocristatus albocristatus, and there are some Berenicornis comatus in Asian bird parks. This appears to confirm 6a) 6) and 7) are correctly identified. Snowman (talk) 10:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The binomial names used for these species are confusing and not consistent across the wiki and commons. I am not sure what is the most up-to-date classification or nomenclature. Snowman (talk) 13:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

An anonymous user has changed the caption for the infobox image on the Kestrel page. Can someone good on hawks check the accuracy of the change please. Snowman (talk) 10:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I've changed it back. The greyish head indicates this is a male; a female would have a brownish head. MeegsC | Talk 12:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I have clarified the description of the image on commons based on your opinion. Snowman (talk) 13:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I have my doubts about the image [Marbled Frogmouth edited.jpg] on this page, the only reference that I can find to Redwood in Queensland is Redwood Park near Toowoomba where this species has never been recorded. I've left a message on the image discussion page and the uploaders page. Aviceda talk 21:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Galapagos white-cheeked pintail duck -pair on land -Santa Cruz highlands.jpg. The White-cheeked Pintail duck on the left with red at the base of its beak is an adult. Is the one on the right a juvenile or a female? Snowman (talk) 13:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably a youngster, but I don't know how definitively. Females should show some amount of pink at the base of the bill (duller than that on a male's bill). None of my reference books here (HBW1, Wildfowl by Madge and Burns, etc.) say anything about females having all dark bills, but all say youngsters are "generally duller than females"... MeegsC | Talk 13:21, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I discovered from various websites that the female has some red on the beak and juveniles do not, so I thought that the duck on the right was a juvenile too. The bad name file will be deleted after a day or two, and I have renamed the image, now at Image:Anas bahamensis -Santa Cruz highlands.jpg. More opinions are welcome, especially regarding the amount of red on the beaks in the adults and juveniles. Snowman (talk) 16:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

At the memoriam to deceased Wikipedian Jeffpw, there is a request to identify the birds in this photo. Please identify the birds in the photo and post the results here. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 15:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The one on top is a Brahminy Kite, is the left one a Lammergeier?? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:56, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The bird on the left looks like a young White-bellied Sea-eagle; it's definitely not a Lammergeier. I agree with Casliber that the others are Brahminy Kites. MeegsC | Talk 17:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Agree with MeegsC, WBSE and Brahminy Kites. Aviceda talk 19:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

There are some more parrots for identification in the section at the top of this page (may be archived soon). One image of a parrot on commons I would like sorted out is 43 on the list above. Image:Derbyan Parakeet-2-2c.jpg (an enhanced version of Image:Derbyan Parakeet.jpg), because I doubt the identity shown. Snowman (talk) 16:52, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The difference in shade of breast and head suggests Psittacula alexandri. This is however smaller than Derby's Parakeet. Shyamal (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

That is what I suspected; it is an adult male Red-breasted Parakeet (Psittacula alexandri). I think that the photographs do not give an impression of the size of the parrots. The image is now at Image:Psittacula alexandri -Jerusalem Biblical Zoo-4.jpg on commons, and the bad name file will be deleted after a few days. Snowman (talk) 16:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Surly there are some better images for the Common Buzzard and the Honey Buzzard pages somewhere? Snowman (talk) 09:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of nice pictures of Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo) on Commons; just click the link at the bottom of the article. Honey Buzzard doesn't have as many options, though at least some are photos rather than paintings. Less common most places, so probably fewer good pictures overall. MeegsC | Talk 10:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

That is reassuring. I added the note here for the people who are interested in hawks. Snowman (talk) 11:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:18, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

• 32. Image:Perico de wagleri.jpg. Image on commons to confirm identity. Snowman (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Judging from Forshaw, Red-spectacled Amazon A. pretrei (?). I am no good at neotropical parrots :( Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I think there are some Aratinga that look like this too. Snowman (talk) 12:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll grab the book again too. You may be right there. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, it is clear the photographer thinks it is the Scarlet-fronted Parakeet (Aratinga wagleri) - aka Red-fronted Conure in Forshaw, but the illustration has the red a little more extensive than the photo, yet others have much less red, there are a bunch of Aratinga which look similar...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Only the upper body is shown in the photograph, so it is not apparent how long these parrots tail feathers are. Snowman (talk) 13:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Have a look on google images and type in the latin name - someone else has already used the image...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I wonder which came first, and I wonder if they are both from the same source. Should it be deleted from commons? The other image contributed by the same editor has got a copyright for images over 70 years old which for a colour photograph would be unusual. Snowman (talk) 19:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no way this photograph is 70 years old..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The contributor has uploaded two images and I have started IfD discussions on commons on both of them, because I am in doubt about their copyright. Snowman (talk) 09:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

• 33. amazon parrot in zoo for identification. Snowman (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Uploaded to commons at Image:Amazona auropalliata -captivity-4.jpg.Snowman (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 34. aratinga parrot in zoo for identification. Snowman (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Uploaded to commons at Image:Aratinga erythrogenys -captivity-6.jpg. Snowman (talk) 16:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 35. arini parrot for identification. Snowman (talk) 12:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Upload to commons at Image:Brotogeris tirica -Brazil-6.jpg -Note no yellow on wings. Snowman (talk) 16:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 36. Image:Loro GFDLeue3.jpg. Amazon on commons for identification. Snowman (talk) 13:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Rename requested. Snowman (talk) 16:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 37. Image:Aratinga erythrogenys-juvenile mainly green.jpg. Arini on commons to confirm identification. Snowman (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  • No changes needed. Snowman (talk) 16:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 38. White cockatoo for identification. Snowman (talk) 10:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Blue-eyed (C. opthalmica) [1] to me, a 'Wallacean' species (though I've even had an escapee in a flock of Sulphur-crested here in Brisbane. Aviceda talk 20:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you; I am surprised that this is the first one of its species on the wiki. Snowman (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploaded to commons to Image:Cacatua ducorpsii-5.jpg. Corrections and file deletion underway on commons. Snowman (talk) 18:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• 39. Lory or lorikeet on flickr for identification. Snowman (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Tail not in photograph; difficult to be sure what bird is from unlabeled flickr image. Not uploaded.
• 40. Image:Josephines Lorikeet (Charmosyna josefinae) -Fort Worth Zoo.jpg. Image on commons to confirm identity. Snowman (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Reuploaded to Image:Charmosyna papou -Fort Worth Zoo-8.jpg, and bad name file listed for deletion.
• 41. Arini for identification. Snowman (talk) 22:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Uploaded to Image:Aratinga wagleri -Jurong BirdPark-6.jpg on commons. It is rather similar to Crimson-fronted Parakeet. Snowman (talk) 16:53, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 42. Image:Biter.JPG. Black cockatoo on commons. Snowman (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Image rename requested on commons. Description added to commons file. Snowman (talk) 17:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
• 43. Image:Derbyan Parakeet-2-2c.jpg. parakeet on commons for identification. Snowman (talk) 19:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
  • 43) Identified as Red-breasted Parakeet (Psittacula alexandri); see under the heading "Asian parakeet" below. Uploaded to Image:Psittacula alexandri -Jerusalem Biblical Zoo-4.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 16:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
• 44. Australian parakeet - thee is already discussion on this photograph on flickr. Snowman (talk) 17:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Uploaded to Image:Psephotus haematonotus (leucistic) -Australia-6.jpg on commons.

33) Yellow-naped. 34) Red-masked. 35) Plain Parakeet. 36) Blue-fronted. 37) ID correct. 38) Not a Blue-eyed (which isn't a Wallacean species, btw), but a Ducorps's. This and the other "corella-like" cockatoos have a pale bill unlike the larger Blue-eyed (... and White, Salmon-crested, Yellow-crested & Sulphur-crested). Among the "corella-like" cockatoos, Ducorps's is the only with a "normal" (i.e. not peculiarly shaped) blue eye-ring. 39) Papuan or Josephine's (probably can't be separated from this photo). 40) Again can't exclude Papuan, but on the other hand I don't see any reason to doubt the claimed Josephine's. 41) Scarlet-fronted Parakeet. 42) Red-tailed. 43) Yes, Red-breasted. • Rabo³ • 12:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, checking ISIS I'll probably have to question #40 anyway. ISIS isn't always completely reliable (listing sometimes out-of-date), but it is still strange that Fort Worth Zoo lists Papuan, but not Josephine's. How was it identified as Josephine's? I can't see anything that separates the two on that photo (no view of the tail), and - contrary to what I had assumed previously - it isn't identified on the flickr page where it originates (in which case one could assume the photographer had noticed). Unless someone has another photo of this bird where it can be identified as a Josephine's I see no reason to question ISIS which only lists Papuan for the Fort Worth Zoo. • Rabo³ • 13:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

In the same photo-stream as #33 there's also a photo of a male Highland Guan [2]. Pretty dark, but probably the only one we're going to see for a while. • Rabo³ • 13:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Highland Guan uploaded to Image:Penelopina nigra -Guatemala-4.jpg and linked to en wiki infobox. Is it a male? Snowman (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes. • Rabo³ • 17:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It seems I forgot #44. The person who suggested Red-rumped Parakeet is correct. It's leucistic. I don't know the yellow mutation the person who commented on it refers to, as this presumably primarily (entirely?) is a captive phenomena. Regardless of this individual matching/not matching what is referred to as the yellow mutations in captivity, it is certainly correct calling it leucistic. • Rabo³ • 17:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I guess the reduced pigmentation of #44 feathers could be due to dermatitis, vitamin deficiency, another disease, or selection of colour mutations for breeding. Snowman (talk) 18:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Scarlet-fronted Parakeet #41 seems to me to be rather similar to Crimson-fronted Parakeet. Is the shade of red important? Snowman (talk) 18:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I have done the most uploading and correcting work; except I am not sure what to do with the lorikeets #39 and #40, nor the Australian parakeet #44 at the present time. Snowman (talk) 18:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

No, the shade of red in #41 is not important, but in this case Crimson-fronted is easily excluded, as the red of its crown never "touches" the white eye-ring. These only "touch" in Scarlet-fronted of two subspecies (frontata and minor). On the contrary, identifying #41 would have been far more complex if the red crown hadn't "touched" the white eye-ring (i.e. the two were separate by green), as this applies to both Crimson-fronted and some subspecies (nominate and transilis) of Scarlet-fronted. Immature Scarlet-fronted also have less red to the crown than adults, but in the odd case where its crown pattern match that of the Crimson-fronted, the darker brown iris would identify it as immature (but this would require good photos). Unless another photo of #39 can be found, I'd suggest not uploading it as there - from what I know - is no way to say for sure what it is based on the presently available photo. IMO #40 is easier: Unless a good argument can be presented as to why this should be a Josephine's, it should be renamed Papuan. #44 might be of some use, and you can upload it as a Red-rumped with a brief note saying it is leucistic. • Rabo³ • 18:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I think your suggestions for the use of #39, #40, and #44 are sensible, and I hope to sort those out on commons soon to clear the backlog here. For #41, I find the grammar a bit complicated with some double negatives and possibly a typo. Do you mean? - Some (but not all) Scarlet-fronted Parakeets have one small zone where there are no green feathers between its white eyering and red feathers. Crimson-fronted Parakeets always have a green rim of feathers completely surrounding its white eyering. I think it might be helpful to include some clues to identification on the article pages at some time in the future. Snowman (talk) 19:14, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I've modified the place I guess could confuse. Also, I just noticed that this relates to #41 (not #34), and have taken the liberty of modifying your earlier comments to avoid further confusion. Hope you don't mind • Rabo³ • 19:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

See above for #39, #40, and #44. Thank you reducing confusion by correcting my typo. Snowman (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• 1. Weaver for identification. Snowman (talk) 09:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The common weaver in JHB used to be Masked (Ploceus velatus) and if that's a red eye then that should confirm it. Aviceda talk 18:09, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

What about a male Village Weaver? Snowman (talk) 19:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I lived there 23 years ago and (as far as I can remember) Village Weaver didn't occur there but there probably has been some taxonomic reshuffling since. If Village Weaver = Spot-backed Weaver (P. splilonotus) then they weren't found in JHB and looking at the back of this bird this is not. [3] Aviceda talk 03:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Check out these refs [4], [5] Aviceda talk 03:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Definitely Ploceus velatus. In addition the the back, it also has a black forehead unlike the various southern subspecies of the Village. • Rabo³ • 16:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploaded to Image:Ploceus velatus -building a nest -Johannesburg.jpg.

• 2. Kingfisher in an Australian Zoo. Snowman (talk) 19:27, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Forest Kingfisher. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Uploaded to commons. Snowman (talk) 22:29, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

• 3. Bird at Brox Zoo for identification. Snowman (talk) 15:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Lesser Bird of Paradise. Even if the head is turned away, the next photo in that photo-stream is perhaps of greater importance for wiki, as we don't have any showing the female. • Rabo³ • 16:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Male uploaded to Image:Paradisaea minor -male -Bronx Zoo.jpg, and Female uploaded to Image:Paradisaea minor -female -Bronx Zoo-3.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 20:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Image of female cropped and linked to article page. Snowman (talk) 21:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• 4. treecreeper for identification. Snowman (talk) 22:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Common Treecreeper. • Rabo³ • 16:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Uploaded to Image:Certhia familiaris -climbing tree-8.jpg on commons. Snowman (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

• 5 hawk for identification. Snowman (talk) 16:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Northern Caracara. • Rabo³ • 16:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The species is called Polyborus plancus on commons. Uploaded to Image:Caracara cheriway -captivity -Guatemala-8.jpg on commons. It is a detailed image, and its feathers look in good condition. Snowman (talk) 20:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

This article doesn't have any images, though I note that there seem to be plenty at Flickr. The only Commons compatible one I can see is this one. Is this the sort of species that is likely to be misidentified? Can anyone confirm that it's the right species? I have noticed a few photos there are inaccurate, so I would prefer to be sure. There doesn't seem to be any information on where it was taken, though I'll ask. Richard001 (talk) 05:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

This isn't a Thayer's. The primary melanism is too pale, and the bill is too bright and deep. SP-KP (talk) 11:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The uploader said her husband is a birder, so I assumed the ID would be correct. What do you think it would be then? Should I just put it at the genus level category? Richard001 (talk) 09:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a Glaucous-winged Gull. Thayer's Gull would have a paler bill and darker (black rather than dark grey) primary tips. It would also show a narrower white trailing edge to the wing. MeegsC | Talk 17:54, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

That's my opinion also. SP-KP (talk) 21:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, this has been expanded a chunk by a new user. I tried to find more material online to add as it was only 142 words two days ago. If it can get to 700 words, it can be a DYK with a nice image to boot. Anyone have any seabird books, galapagos books or access to the fultext of the Laridae taxonomy article to embellish it with? Be a shame not to get a DYK out of it (which is virtually assured if qualifies. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It needs a bit of a clean up first, tighten the prose and also remove duplication of info on the nocturnal lifestyle. I will endeavour to dig some more info up. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks to be just about 700 words now. First Light (talk) 05:15, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

fantastic. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

i've being trying to find more info on tapetum lucidum in this bird. What I've found is contradictory. Several susgestion that owls and nightjars (goatsuckers?) have reflective layers. But a 2004 paper "Comparative morphology of the tapetum lucidum (among selected species)" says "Some species (primates, squirrels, birds, red kangaroo and pig) do not have this structure". Grantus4504 (talk) 08:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea, but I have made a DYK nom on T:TDYK :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

What is contradictory? Some animals have them and some do not. Humans do not have them. Snowman (talk) 11:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

The TP article implies that no species of birds have a tapetum lucidum. Grantus4504 (talk) 22:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

It may be from this ref on the TP page, but I can not access the full article. Snowman (talk) 23:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That's the article, I can't access it either. And no results for a search on tapetum lucidum in Ibis Grantus4504 (talk) 05:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

^[1] says the birds examined, which included owls, don't have a TP jimfbleak (talk) 10:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

1886 is a bit out of date, since the Swallow-tailed Gull article is 1967. Here's a 1974 article about TP in Goatsuckers [6] Grantus4504 (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Found reference for TP in birds, added to that page. Grantus4504 (talk) 06:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

There seems to be more than one kind of tapetum lucidum - this one is on the iris-

Tapetum lucidum iridis. This structure reported in the iris of columbiform birds consists of reflective cells iridocyti which are visible in histological sections under transmitted or polarized light. Chiasson and Ferris (1968) described two types of cells in the Inca Dove (Scardafella inca): cells with large reflecting platelets scattered in the superficial layer of the iris and deeper cells with smaller platelets forming a more discrete iridocyte body Corpus iridocytorum.

— p 597 Howard E Evans and Graham R Martin in Handbook of Avian Anatomy: Nomina anatomica avium 2e (ed. Julian J. Baumel. 1993, Nuttall Ornithological Club)

• Chiasson, R. B. and Ferris, W. R. 1968. The iris and associated structures of the Inca Dove (Scardafella inca). Amer. Zool. 8: 818. HTH Shyamal (talk) 09:28, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Adolphe-Simon Neboux is currently the only redlink (two occurrences) on the page. Snowman (talk) 20:31, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

It is an article on French Wikipedia. See what I can do. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

The following comment is on the talk page: "This article refers to a taxon that doesn't have its type locality listed. If you can, please provide it." What does this mean? Snowman (talk) 21:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

For an example of a species which does have its type locality listed, see Rufous Flycatcher-thrush - look at the bottom of the taxobox. SP-KP (talk) 22:34, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that one is a bad example because it links to a dab page. From the rather over complex page on "type locality", I think it means the place where it was first found. Snowman (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

That's correct. I'll see if I can fix the link to the dab page. SP-KP (talk) 07:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

To be precise, every species has a type of some kind, often a specimen deposited in a museum. The species is defined to comprise all organisms of the same species as the type (allowing for debate on which populations are really the same species). If the type is a specimen, the type locality is the place where the specimen was taken.

Obviously, if the species was well known before Linnaeus (e.g., Passer domesticus or Poa trivialis), you can't say that the type locality is where the species was first found. Even in the case of species whose discovery by science was later, the first ones found may not have included the first specimen deposited as a type, for various reasons.

I agree that Biological type has serious problems. I'd say the main problem with it is that the lead is inadequate. If I knew what I was talking about, I'd fix it. (That means my authoritative-sounding comments above may not be perfect.) —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:16, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Some of the birds in the images on the page are clearly from the Galapagos Islands as indicated by the captions and the descriptions of the source files on flickr. Will that do? Snowman (talk) 18:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

First, Image:Common_skylark.jpg appears to be misidentified—the bird is in Victoria, Aus., and the face pattern doesn't look like the other pictures. Maybe someone who knows Australian birds can correct it. (Have we had this picture before? I'm getting a feeling of déjà asked.)

The above list for WP 0.7 prompted me to look at Nightingale. The "Culture" section, which may be the most important section for this famous bird, is embarrassingly paltry. I can put some stuff in with sources eventually, and that might be a nice project for others too, but that led me to the question of what "nightingale" means in translations. Does all that Russian technical terminology about nightingale songs refer to this species or the Thrush-Nightingale or both? And possibly translators from Middle Eastern languages have used "nightingale" for bulbuls. Following the interwiki tells me that Turkish bülbül means nightingale, but apparently Persian (Farsi) bolbolo or something means bulbul. The situation is probably confusing. The Farsi page linked to from nightingale has pictures of bulbuls. What bird should I imagine in "with Wine! Wine! Wine!/ Red wine!—the Nightingale cries to the Rose"? Does anyone know whether these questions have been straightened out somewhere? That would save me some research, and I'm not guaranteed to reach a conclusion on my own.

Speaking of that Farsi page, which I can't link to because the title is in Farsi, it has lots of bulbul pictures that aren't on Commons. The photographer, apparently named Mohammadian, hasn't put the Latin names in the description page. So another fun project would be for someone to move them all to Commons (they're GFDL) and identify them. I could do the moving, though not right away, but I don't want to identify Iranian bulbuls. Heck, someone could even look through Mohammadian's contributions for jpg's of more birds and other good stuff. Unfortunately, on his user page he lists his languages as Farsi and level-1 Arabic, so getting him to help or even letting him know would require finding a Farsi-speaker (anyone here)?

The only way I know to see the pictures is to go to nightingale and click on the interwiki link just below Esperanto. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 21:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I know skylarks have been introduced to New Zealand and Australia, and the only other species of lark in Oz is the Singing Bushlark which looks like this. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The Australian image is of a Rufous Songlark. See [7] SP-KP (talk) 22:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah ha. I didn't think of other lark-named species. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I contacted the photographer. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

One reason the popular culture bit for nightingale is paltry is that I conducted a purge removing trivia and other unsourced. Not every occurrence of nightingale is notable enough for an encyclopaedia, especially if unsourced. jimfbleak (talk) 10:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

That's why I said I'd put in sources. I just found one that says that Keats's "Ode to a Nightingale" is the greatest poem ever written about a bird. (It's also the greatest poem in the English language, but I suppose I can't cite myself.) —JerryFriedman (Talk) 20:12, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Please consider commenting at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visual gallery of toucans. Thanks. -- Suntag ☼ 06:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello. How do I join WikiProject Birds? I am working on the Macaroni Penguin article for a class project, so I would like to do so. You can check out the project here:Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2008, if you want to know more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LNG123 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome. You join the project just by adding your username (preferably in alphabetical order) to the Participants section on the project page. (Click "project page" at the top of this page.) You can ask questions and contribute to discussions right here. Please sign your contributions to talk pages (such as this one) with four tildes, ~~~~.

I added a section header to separate this section from the argument about "British", "of Britain", "of the UK". As section headers are an important part of "Good" articles, you may want to edit this page to see the simple way to make the header.

I wish you every success with your work on the article! —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the help. I will be sure to do so, and hopefully my work on the Macaroni Penguin will contrubute to the project!--LNG123 (talk) 17:16, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

While trying to improve birdwatching I found few sources of etymology and usage of the word "birding" - Merriam Webster gives 1918 as the year of origin and Stephen Moss' "A bird in the bush" uses them interchangeably without any introductory note, although he provides a good account of the origins of "twitching". My POV has been that the usage of "twitcher" was pejorative but would like confirmation or correction with reliable sources. Also I have nominated "birdwatching" for collaboration since it is quite an important topic and one that can benefit from a wider geographic perspective. Shyamal (talk) 02:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

As an occasional twitcher, I wouldn't view it as negative. Birding World magazine began its life as Twitching. jimfbleak (talk) 06:03, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I have always heard the term twitcher used to describe someone who will travel the length and breadth of the land to see a single vagrant as opposed to someone simply wanting to watch birds. Whether you consider is pejorative depends on your opinion of that kind of birdwatching. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Well after a load of species articles, we have Antbird on the cusp of FAC, Bird of prey is new collaboration, and Ara (genus) must be close to GAN (?) ...and with that I ned to go get some shut-eye. I expect to see 2 at GAN and 1 at FAC by the time I wake up...(just kidding..). Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

A Field Guide to the Birds of The Gambia and Senegal (Barlow and Wacher, 2006) says, "Whole structure is usually placed high in the fork of a tree and is used year after year." The Firefly Encyclopedia of Birds (2003, this article is by Hancock and Kushlan) says, "Nests are typically abandoned after a few months, when the bird builds a new one within its territory." After a little looking on the Internet, I didn't find anything that looked more authoritative than these two books, though of the few sources I found, most said the bird reuses the nest. Can anyone reconcile this? Does anyone want to look in HBW? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 00:02, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

I can look at HBW tomorrow. From memory they tend to build lots of nests which quickly get abandoned and used by other creatures. These nests may as easily be inhabited by an owl or some snakes, which makes potential predators less inclined to have a look. It has also gotten the species a reputation in Africa for shape shifting. Sabine's Sunbird talk 03:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting, thanks! While you're at it, does it say there are more legends about the Hammerkop than any other bird? The Monterey Bay guy seems to cite it for that belief. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 05:18, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so they are described in the HBW as "compulsive nest builders" building 3 to 5 nests a year. In many cases they are ususrped by eagle owls or barn owls, but in many cases they will move back into nests when the owls leave. They build all year irrespective of whether they are breeding or not. Sounds like a DYK hook to me. There are a few legends mentioned, but it qualifies the statement there are more legends with a it is claimed. Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, now things are making sense. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 04:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Dasornis (large extinct pelican-like bird from the Miocene) has been in the news recently - people will be looking to Wikipedia for info. Our article is only three sentences, one of which is "This creature is thought to have been sighted on September 27, 2008 in France." (no cite). Can anybody give this article some much-needed help? Thanks. -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 13:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Decided to be bold and moved the Old World species from here into Nisaetus (after the works of Helbig et al., Gjershaug et al.) however being diffident and lacking sufficient access to literature, I would like someone to recheck this cluster. Shyamal (talk) 05:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I would like to propose a name change for List of British birds: introduced or feral species to List of introduced or feral bird species of Great Britain. A name change has been discussed before but for different reasons. The name change would move the article inline with the rest of the species lists of Great Britain, which is currently being work on by Wikipedia:WikiProject Biota of Great Britain and Ireland. Great Britain is more accurate than Britain and the wording of the current title is very messy. Any views? Jack (talk) 10:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Against—Jack's move of all things faunal from "British" to "Great Britain" is by no means supported by all. My argument to him on his Talk page is that fauna lists are done by country. Britain and Ireland are exceptional simply because they're islands. Northern Ireland is part of the UK not the Irish Republic, so the "correct" attribution has (IMHO) to be "UK" rather than "Great Britain"—GRM (talk) 17:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Fauna lists are done by country? What about List of birds of Great Britain, which the BOU publishes referring to British meaning Great Britain? Jack (talk) 18:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The page refers to both "in Great Britain" and "in the British Isles". The references to Ireland are equivocal. I suspect people will have to settle what region the list covers before deciding on a title. It's possible that more than one list is needed. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 03:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I had not, in fact, realized that the BOU had made a decision to stop reporting the list of birds for Northern Ireland; however, its presumed existence (somewhere?) suggests that a country list for the UK is possible. Barring that, maybe users would prefer to see separate lists for Great Britain and Northern Ireland; though, technically, a separate list would then be needed for the Isle of Man (I have not worked that issue out!)... I see that the effort has been made to separate out a List of birds of Wales and there is a Fauna of Scotland page, but does anyone want a "List of birds of England" or more specific list for Scotland? Anyway, what do others think of the suggested rename we started from?—GRM (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so should we have articles for both List of birds of Great Britain and List of birds of the United Kingdom? When they've been completed then maybe a List of birds of England could be created. Cheers, Jack (talk) 16:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That would make sense to me, assuming there would be interest in both. But how big are the differences? —JerryFriedman (Talk) 16:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the genus is gone http://eagleconservationalliance.org/discussions/ but in the Hieraaetus article we state that "Hieraaetus" spilogaster, "Hieraaetus" weiskei and "Hieraaetus" ayresii are retained. Shyamal (talk) 05:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

One authority doesn't have it any more, but if other authorities retain it, maybe we should. Unless we consider the Eagle Conservation Alliance to be more reliable than the others, or we understand their reasons and agree with them. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 14:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Most of the references in support are old ones, are there any which retain it after the research that led to Hieraaetus being mixed within Aquila clade? Shyamal (talk) 15:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on an essay about writing articles on birds for Wikipedia. It is in response to the Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2008 as a tool for new writers, but I hope to make it more widely available after I have finished it. I will probably make a modified version for writing about animals in general. This refelcts my own opinions and thoughts on writing about birds, but I'd be interested to get feedback on the first three sections. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I recently discovered Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange and this Wikipedia:WikiProject_Resource_Exchange/Shared_Resources where people can help with looking up books and journals. Could be included as a resource. Shyamal (talk) 04:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

This is on a river in Florida. Beyond Passeriformes, I haven't really got a clue. By the way, should we have a separate identification requests page, or is that too specific? Richard001 (talk) 06:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Probably a Common Grackle, but it is hard to tell. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you place it at the family or genus level with certainty? I'll move it to Commons one day soon but a specific category would be good. Richard001 (talk) 21:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure it is a grackle. I'd leave it to someone more familiar with East Coast birds to ID it further, but the tail isn't huge. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:20, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello all...

An image used in the article, specifically Image:Gekraagde Roodstaart 20040627.JPG, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I uploaded that picture of the Fan-tailed Widowbird here (or uncropped if you prefer), but I'm getting misgivings about its sex. Zimmerman, Turner, and Pearson say the male has "scarlet" epaulettes; the female has "ochre, orange-yellow or russet". I thought they were russet in the picture, but maybe someone with normal color vision should check that. And even if they really aren't scarlet, how confident are we that the male's wing coverts can't be the color in the picture? Maybe the best we can say is that the image doesn't show a breeding male. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 14:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

They look russet to me. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll leave it the way it is, then. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 17:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Bork bork bork! Enjoy. Sabine's Sunbird talk 22:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

XD. very funny. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I've gone and finally done it. Antbird is at FAC. Please go have a look to cheer or boo. Sabine's Sunbird talk 00:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone help with a request? Please takle a look at the article for any sections that would be obvious to me but less so to someone new to birds (Per Tony's comment at the FAC). Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I have created an important new Commons category for birds: commons:Category:Bird videos. There seems to be some good stuff on YouTube too, I'm going to try getting some people to release their work under a Commons friendly license. Richard001 (talk) 09:11, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

An occasional one on flickr too, but they are in the wrong format there. Have you got any suggestions on how to change the format. What size should the videos be on the page? Snowman (talk) 09:13, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to convert mpgs, wmvs etc to ogg on Windows but I use the Kino_(software) program in Ubuntu (Linux) and I think the command-line program Ffmpeg2theora is quite useful, I think you can see from this weekend's reverted edits that the clip thumbs shouldn't be displayed below 300px. Aviceda talk 09:44, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I do not see the reason for the 300px size for videos, because they generally appear on the page as a rather blurred static image, which generally makes the artwork on the page worse. A viewer could easily click on a small video image to view the video at a higher resolution, as is possible with static images. I suggest that they are made much smaller. They can be put in a gallery, and a viewer could still view them at a higher resolution simply by clicking on the image. They do not have to be shown at the 300px size to be meaningful, because they can be viewed at a resolution even larger than 300px by simply clicking on the image. Snowman (talk) 09:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Good point, though do you feel the newer-clips are more aesthetic? ie White-eared_Monarch. I would like to re-create better-quality thumbs for those old analogue-clips though (will probably make that my next endeavour, now my PC is working properly again). Aviceda talk 02:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I like seeing the videos when they get going, and they are amazing with sound. The newer clips are also best viewed (at a larger size) by starting them by double clicking over the image. What is the best way to present them? Does the caption need to indicate that they can be viewed by double clicking over the image? This is a video on flikr of an Orange-winged Amazon parrot talking in flv format. Can you edit and change the format of this one? If edited correctly, only the second half is with the picture the right way up, it might be fine on the "flagship" parrot page. Snowman (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't know what the problem might be Aviceda, but I don't hear the sound when I run the White-eared Monarch video. I haven't had problems with other videos you've uploaded... MeegsC | Talk 17:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

With the White-eared Monarch clips I'm not sure what the problem is, I can view and hear sound through Firefox2 and IE7 in Windows XP, but no sound through Firefox3 in Linux. As for the Flickr parrot video, I'm fairly certain that I can't edit .flv video files and can't seem to download it, will have a go shortly and see if I can do anything with Adobe Premiere Elements (like rotate) but even if I'm successful I won't be able to put it on WP without the owners permission. Aviceda talk 06:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The author has licensed it suitable for the wiki, so it definitely can be uploaded to commons. It can be downloaded with a download tool (such as the Mozilla add-on), and I have managed to change it to an avi with the tool, but not an ogg. Snowman (talk) 10:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

If you could tell me how to download it, I can rotate it in Adobe PE and possibly convert it in Kino, good-work! Aviceda talk 10:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I used the free facilities (free download tool and free file conversion tool functions) of this download helper. In Mozilla it adds an extra icon, which has a variety of options. I presume that there are lots of other ways of doing the same, and I do not know about any of the other methods. Snowman (talk) 10:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Snowman, Downloaded Downloadhelper and tried it out in Firefox on XP, seems to work but not for the Flickr parrot image that you require, it doesn't seem to recognize Flickr movie-clips....what do you have to do to get it? Aviceda talk 04:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I haven't had any luck with YouTube so far, though I have only asked a few people and only one was a bird related video (and there are more of this species there anyway). I'm sure I will be uploading some videos one day. I might also try to get some ornithologists to contribute to Wikipedia - maybe writing an article that we haven't covered yet or something? Richard001 (talk) 08:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I managed to get a tui video, pending OTRS. I have emailed a couple of people, but no responses so far. I note that Tim Caro has written a detailed book about anti-predator adaptations in birds and mammals, and emailed him about writing one about such adaptations in birds, but it is a bit of a long shot. Still, if I ask enough people I'm sure I'll get a positive result sooner or later, and asking someone takes a lot less time than becoming an expert on a subject yourself. Richard001 (talk) 11:48, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I have a few [seabird] clips on YouTube [8]. I expect I could convert them to a wiki-friendly format in Vegas 9. Grantus4504 (talk) 08:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I nominated Image:Tasmanian Native-hen.jpg as a featured picture candidate at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Tasmanian Native-hen.jpg. It has been there for a few days without many votes either way. I'd appreciate it if a few people could take a look at the image and support or oppose to make it's status clear before the nomination is over. In addition the Tasmanian Native-hen article's references need a cleanup I think (if I don't get around to it). Noodle snacks (talk) 22:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)