Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 9

243:, I am increasingly convinced that all species level articles should follow their Latin names, with redirects for common names. I find DJLayton4's argument for plant articles convincing, and I believe we should keep the MOS as simple as possible. Going with Latin names is the only way to achieve this. Parentheses are ugly, cause layout and rendering difficulties, and break up prose visually. I think we should abandon them entirely for Latin names, not just the first line. However, my strongest belief is that we should not create yet another exception for the first line, so what I am "voting" for here is consistency between the first line and every other instance of a binomial, and I believe this is most achievable with the comma. I hold this opinion in spite of parentheses being standard in abstracts of peer-reviewed publications. I think Knowledge (XXG) can do better, and we may just wish to drop the apologetic parentheses entirely. Latin names are nothing to be ashamed of. 262:, they're going to quickly give up. This is an encyclopedia, not a scientific journal!! As for the comment that parentheses are "apologetic", that seems a bit silly. It's just a way of separating out information that may or may not be of particular use to the reader. For those who are interested in and knowledgable about scientific names, it gives more information. For those who haven't a clue -- and have no interest in learning more about them -- that's ok too. Why FORCE people to deal with scientific names just because some think parenthese are "ugly"! As a for-instance, I'm NOT a botanist. However, I am interested in learning more about plants -- and I find the botany section of Knowledge (XXG) very difficult to use. I can seldom find the articles I'm really looking for, because I don't know enough about the taxonomy of plants to know even which genera of plants I should be looking in! Just an alternative viewpoint... 1285:, there's unfortunately a fair scattering of errors in the list avibase generates. It had in e.g. California Quail and Northern Bobwhite, not even tagged as introductions, yet I can't find any evidence that either species had been introduced to Morocco; it also had e.g. Painted Snipe, which again isn't even listed as an accidental in Morocco by BWPC and strikes me as a very unlikely candidate for turning up there too. I removed those altogether as unsupported. There's several other species included which aren't listed by BWPC, but which I left in as they are potential vagrants which could have been recorded since BWPC came out; these need to be double-checked against recent publications of the Moroccan Rare Birds Committee (will do later). Also a very large number (close to 100 in just the non-passerines) were not tagged as accidentals by avibase, but which are so by BWPC. - 594:. Google is unable to find a source, no ref I have ever come across mentions such a taxon, and altogether I find the idea of turkeys in Japan biogeographically as absurd as post-Paleogene hummingbirds in Europe. Apparently some lapsus or misunderstanding, but what is it based upon? People don't just so invent taxa that are taxonomically possible but not systematically... usually, they'd make mistakes like capitalizing the species name or ending everyting with "-us"... the user in question has spent an inordinate amount of time to create redlinks (which I will prune away as is probably SOP for such lists. At least the sp indet's. We have these taxa as redlinks on the genus pages, so the list should not be a sea of red but only linked when the pages become available) 1028:

journals favouring capitalised common names. Interestingly, and for no reason I can explain, the leading tropical fish magazine in the US forbids capital letters for common names while the leading magazine in the UK prefers them! So maybe it isn't so simple. Anyway, the bottom line would seem to me to be simple enough: in ornithology, there's a tradition of using capitalised common names and those common names have been agreed among workers in the field. I don't have any issues with this. But this is *absolutely* not the case in most other animal groups, and the edit you made is entirely what I was hoping for: a statement that what goes for birds *does not automatically* go other groups. So thanks! Neale

3195:

create the articles as redirects and post a to-do list here of "redirected monotypic genera to check". The worst problems seem to arise when the bot does things that might cause problems without alerting anybody or that require people to check through thousands of new articles to find a small subset with potential problems. The solution is (sorry to pile on) consulting beforehand and maybe switching the bot to unproblematic tasks after the first few dozen or few hundred edits of a new type; that way people can alert you to problems while there are only a few instances.

217:, and does not actually state the Psittacinae subfamily. I'm wondering about this: the resource I linked to is very reputable and informative, but there seems to be a bit of a conflict with the article. It seems that, at the very least, a bit more explanation on the taxonomic groups this bird belongs to would be well-placed (the article is featured, after all). Or maybe I'm just not reading this right, since birds are not my field of expertise (but I find them very interesting). 1214:, I thought using his own bot. However other lists (including Spain) were done manually by me - they are the ones listed on my user page, and they shouldn't be too bad in terms of nomenclature since I changed the Avibase names - they certainly shouldn't be deleted. I also substantially fixed Thailand and Kenya . The best way to correct the names for countries outside the Americas would presumably be to use a bot, but I have the computing skills of an ant, so I can't do it. 31: 966:). Do you have any ICZN rules (or similar) that indicate that the common names in Mammal Species of the World are of the same legal standing as the binomial scientific names? I admit to being an invertebrate taxonomist, and the species I have named are never likely to get common names, but still, I'm operating from my experience of the scientific process where common names are never used nor defined. Cheers, Neale 2484:

which begin with the letter T so by the time it's finished, I imagine there will be fewer than 200 articles left outstanding. Given the high number of active contributors of bird-related material, we ought to be able to complete this task easily - how about we set ourselves a little target of having them all done by the end of the year?

2893:

Can the bot be held? It has a number of problems: monotypic genera, nonstandard IUCN link code, "habitat destruction", not using italics in genus taxoboxes, nonstandard use of markup in synonyms section, entirely wrong and indiscriminate use of parentheses in synonyms section. These NEED to be fixed,

1560:

There is a lot of drive-by stubbing. Length of article is only one criterion. For example, genus articles are often short because additions would tend to be more relevant to the family or species level. If I feel that an article has been stubbed purely on length, invariably by an editor unfamiliar to

961:

Uther -- My reading of the Mammal Species of the World page suggests that the common names are merely recommendations for simplicity. Similar projects exist on Fishbase, Cephbase, etc. But such names have no standing in scientific nomenclature. The ICZN has no rules for enforcing common names, since,

3194:

On monotypic genera, Polbot really needs to know what's in a genus when it creates the article. Maybe one of the suggestions I left at your talk page will work. If not, I recommend posting a to-do list here of "monotypic general from the IUCN that possibly should be redirects". Or, maybe as good,

3190:

On the long lists of countries, I was just whingeing (sp?). It's better to have the information than not have it, and eventually humans with range maps may be able to improve on those lists where possible. I mentioned the importance of distinguishing between vagrancy and regular occurrence at your

3082:

First off, let me admit my limitations: I'm just a computer programmer who thinks birds are pretty. I'm not an ornithologist -- I'm embarrassed to admit I haven't had a formal biology class of any sort since high school. I absolutely need the advice from you experts to get these new stubs right. For

1004:

While I agree with the objections to some of the side issues you raised, Neale, I've also complied with your request. We at WP Birds are not setting a standard for all fauna articles. Any such thing would have to be decided by a wider discussion (which I guess is going on, at least piecemeal). So

717:

is actually doing quite good work - I have gone through almost 100 stubs now, and this is the first real mistake. Of course the bot cannot know whether leucura or leucurus is correct; I suspect it simply checked whether L.leucura was already created and since it was not there, created a stub for the

2864:

My real point is that while some here are capable of making their own decisions on these questions based on the facts, I don't have the expertise or the library. So I'm going to go back to the HBW taxonomy for consistency, and if the question ever gets settled the other way, someone will just have

2007:

Thank you so, so much for adding the quotes. I was procrastinating like there would be no tomorrow. (One thing - please use the quote template next time you put up quotes.) I think we're ready - let's let everyone look it over and then I'll make an announcement. Any help with the announcement would

1231:

server to the appropriate new article. For the mammal lists I did later, I built in some checking for the existence of articles rather than disambiguation pages, redlinks, and redirects, but I didn't think of that for these, which is why there are odd spellings and punctuation abominations, and why

933:

somewhere that makes it clear that the naming guidelines put forward here are unique to birds and not general to animals? Having capitalised animal names on Knowledge (XXG) looks like amateur hour to me and probably most scientists. I've managed to negotiate a set of scientifically sound rules over

551:

the FWS would label things correctly. However having listened to the original source (which is a bit longer than the downloaded one), I'm not convinced about this particular cut. I also find it hard to believe that the USFWS post recordings with absolutely no indication of where or when they were

3090:

For monotypic genera, I could make them redirects to the species articles. The reason I didn't is that I don't know whether the IUCN list is correct for birds are not. I wouldn't want to make a genus a redirect to a species if there's another species in the genus I don't know about. Do you think I

923:

whether it should be "lion" or "Lion" throughout. As a scientist, I know that capitalisation is never used for the vast majority of animal names, but amateurs seem not to. Birds seem to be an exception because you have large numbers of amateurs observing birds and an agreed set of common names for

3094:

Polbot currently references a "Fauna of X country" category in each endemic species (and only in endemic species). Most countries have such a category, but some do not. Some have a more specific "Birds of X country" category, and I wouldn't be surprised if some have even more specific categories.

2778:

Romping all over the lists, redirecting monotypic genera, killing empty categories and cropping genus lists on those looong pages. If Polbot learned that not everything rare is rare due to habitat loss, learned how to deal with monotypic genera, and learned not list ALL the common names, it would

2483:

Under the task list (at the bottom of the project page), I've added a list of the bird genera for which articles do not yet exist. I've used the Clements list as my source - and the good news is that we only have about 10% of the c.2100 genera left to do (Polbot is currently working through those

1027:

Hello Jerry. I took a look through some journals. Some, like Journal of Zoology, explicitly forbid capitals of common names completely. Others, like Copeia, insist on them where *recognised* common names exist. The split seems (at my first pass) to be between the US and everyone else, with the US

296:

Ah! I thought your comment "I think we should abandon them entirely for Latin names, not just the first line." referred to the COMMON NAME, not the parentheses! Sorry about that... :) However, I DO think it's okay to start the article with the common name(s), followed by the scientific names.

125:

for FA-factory genus articles. While I don't plan to stop writing genus articles, I do see his point and I've been thinking about redoing this article for awhile. As the article obviously falls under the purview of both of our Projects, I thought I'd put the word out here too. Anyone who can help

2878:

And while I'm at it, my main objection to categories of birds by country is the long lists of country names you get. However, Polbot is creating such lists in "prose". I don't feel that a list of 38 African country names in alphabetical order (Black-bellied Bustard) is useful to the reader—but

1387:

In my experience, usage tends to vary somewhat according to the species being described, with 'bill' used for species where it is smaller and/or softer (e.g. warblers, ducks), and 'beak' for species where it is larger and/or harder (e.g. raptors, herons). I'd be inclined to leave it open and not

3116:

Polbot adds the BirdTalk template to talk pages, and classifies them all as stubs. They're probably all low priority (since they didn't previously have articles), but I'm just not qualified to make that sort of a determination. Should Polbot default these all to low priority, or just leave that

1230:

was the template as I recall) made some immediately obvious corrections, and some corrections to the orders, families, and counts from Fowler's checklist, and calculated the statistics for each group. It isn't a bot as it never does anything on wiki: I cut and pasted the resulting files from my

253:

I'm afraid I have to disagree with Spamsara -- I think changing all references to the scientific name is a HORRIBLE idea. And that's despite the fact that I'm a scientist. Most people who use Knowledge (XXG) as a reference are probably not going to be scientists. They may not know much about

1200:

Not to mention grammatical abominations like hyphens before capitals, too ("Golden-Plover"). Rather more seriously, if they are auto-generated by some published software, placing them on wikipedia is very likely a copyright violation against the software producer. Most of these list-generating

650:. It's a motherlode of information, but some cannot be taken at face value. Get it, read it, fire away! It needs discussion, because it has far-ranging implications, being the first study of fossil penguins in 60 years(!) that gives sufficient resolution to actually translate it into taxonomy. 254:

scientific names. (If you want an example of that, just have a look at the picture files in Wikimedia Commons, where scientific names are SUPPOSED to be used, and see what a mess it is.) If they're going to type in something like Robin and get something that NEVER refers to Robin but only to

1190:

This is also especially a problem for the auto-generated lists for countries outside N America. AFAIK, the lists prior to the autogeneration are more or less OK, and I've substantially cleaned up Thailand and Kenya since, but the fact remains that most of the lists use US names and spelling

2204:

I highly recommend Kenya for birding! Here are some pictures of birds that have no articles… just in case anyone has a source and feels like writing something. If no one does, I'll make stubs for them eventually, but stubs are all I can do with Zimmerman, Turner, and Pearson. Although

928:

as justification for capitalising clams and trees and bacteria and whatnot. There are no "official" common names for anything other than birds, and absolutely no tradition of capitalising their common names in the scientific literature. Can we please have a statement added to

3198:

On problems like "in the ] family", Polbot might be able to change it to "in the ] family automatically. If it keeps a record of what families it did that with, you or someone can check that the substitutions are okay, or maybe you can tell it the correct family names

1767:

I thought of a bird portal a while back too......but I discounted the idea because I thought time would be spent updating the portal instead of updating articles. But a bird portal would be nice and I'd be glad to help, especially if we can new people involved through

1321:

says re: Morocco, a number of species on the Avibase list have never been recorded in The Gambia, or species have been recorded in the country but aren't on the list. So I'm not sure how reliable that information is. Maybe it's better for certain parts of the world.

2037:

The portal is officially up and running. I have it set to update automatically for next week and the week after that. Any help, as always, is welcome, as are comments. Maybe we can have a portal peer review in the near future, once it has been up for a little while.

1014:, capitalize all species names for consistency. You might see something like, "The White-bellied Go-away-bird was disturbed by a Lion and flew into a Yellow-barked Acacia. This species often perches in acacias." I don't know which side this is an argument for. — 1225:

They aren't copyvios. The lists were generated by a script I wrote which pulled the information from from Avibase, existing lists and articles on Knowledge (XXG) (I don't have access to the the script from here, so I can't check which ones, but the featured

2720:

has had - it's basically filled in all the missing redlinks. I'm not thrilled, but, whatever. Time to clean up. I've asked the bot's creator for a list of everything created so that we can see what needs doing, but first off, a bit of duplication. We have

984:

2. The terms 'amateur' and 'scientist' are not mutually exclusive. Next time you feel the need to draw a distinction, try 'layman' instead. It may not suit your sense of superiority quite as well, but it will get your point across much more effectively.

2521:. Genetic data (Sheldon 1987, Sheldon et al. 1995, McCracken & Sheldon 1998) also indicate substantial divergence between these taxa, consistent with treatment as separate genera; furthermore, it is not yet certain that the two are sister genera." ( 1802:

I'm busting my gut on it. The wretched article is already 54k long and has 60 refs (it will probably have twice as many refs when I've finished) and is maybe two weeks off being peer-reviewable. Concievably it could be featured by the begining of June.

2529:

Jerry, the SACC guys are usually very on their toes about these things; I suspect it's AOU and Clements that are lagging behind. I suggest we split Nyctanassa out - or if we don't, create a redirect and explain the synonymy in the Nycticorax article.

1686:

was featured though (should be happening by June). I think we have a decent number of featured and good articles and lots of interesting did you knows, as well as plenty of featured images here and in the commons, so it wouldn't be too hatrd to do.

3208:

Don't let the presence of experts fool you. Some of us are acting like experts without ever taking a biology course past high school, and have no opinion at all on whether (*looks up article*) the scrubwrens and gerygones belong in Pardalotidae.

1536:. I have to say that a lot of these articles look on the long side to be stubs at all, though; it might be worth the the WPJ having a discussion about localised stub criteria, especially if you're also doing 1.0-style article assessements. 1191:(abominations like Gray Heron) use names that suggest the US subspecies (White-winged Scoter, Red Crossbill on European lists) and don't recognise several splits (Common Scoter doesn't appear on the European autolists, but Black Scoter does) 1109:"List of the birds of country x" (taking into account the comments made in the previous discussion section) that we could eliminate the "Birds of country x" category as being redundant. The list, after all, would give far more information. 1546:

We might want to compare non-stub articles of the same level (order, family...) to draw up a list of minimum topics, like the evolving consensus what makes a species article a nonstub. Then the articles can be worked over rather routinely.

1504:

In Britain, the term used amongst birders in my experience is bill; beak is regarded more as a word used by "the public", a bit like seagull. HBW seems to use bill exclusively (someone will now find an example where it doesn't, I'm sure!)

347:

article. Any comments on whether we should have a separate article on BIRD nests or whether we should incorporate all animal nests (including birds, great apes, wasps, turtles, alligators, snakes, dinosaurs, etc.) into the same article?

3413:

Thank you. Anything with "tern" in the species name should be changed to Sternidae, and the lead sentence should say "a species of ]", not "a species of ]. As far as I know, no other articles need this change. (Sabine's Sunbird fixed

3120:

The IUCN link is cut-and-pasted from the "recommended citation" thing on the IUCN page. It's actually easier for me to do that than reformat it into an IUCN source template. Is that okay? Is there some reason why it's better to use the

2681:

They might want information about why the picture looks the way it does. For birds, this can include age, sex, plumage, subspecies, and morph. However, if this information gets unwieldy, it can be left for the picture's description

1583:

This list is almost complete. I need help, though, finding out which birds are accidental, hypothetical, extirpated, etc. I have a number of them marked, but I'm aware that there are still some unmarked accidentals in there (e.g.,

1984:

The portal is pretty much complete. All that needs to be done is adding quotes. I will automate it a week after it has been put up. Please find bird quotes and add them. Notify me when you think it's done, and I will announce it.

825:

Lions are indeed a weak case in point; I don't think their chultural significance has ever changed between cultures and eras. Ravens on the other hand are a more ambiguous lot, and removing the section here arguably would violate

201:, but it seems to be a bit quiet around there. My question concerns the taxonomy of the Kakapo. Currently, in the article, it is said to be in the family Psittacidae, and the subfamily Psittacinae. I'm currently reading through " 3098:

Polbot used to list French and Spanish common names as well as English ones. I fixed that, but the problem remains on older entries. That's hard to fix retroactively. I figure it's not that big of a problem. (I'm hoping you

3051:

is listed as being from the Falklands and South Georgia; its really just a vagrant there. And the new genus articles are not adding existing species articles to their lists, only the ones that POLBOT has created. Grrrr.....

2106:. I've been working like crazy on it and its actually close to finished though. It'll be peer reviewable in a week or less. Do we want to collaborate on it through this stage or do we want to pick something else? Thoughts? 2670:

Looking at the list of genera to do made me notice the caption at the example taxobox in the project page. I'd like to suggest that in captions, people think about what information readers need and what they don't need.

948:

On the contrary, Mammal Species of the World (3rd 2005) *is* the official source for common names for mammals, as it follows the work of (I believe) Walker 2000 which first lay out official common names for mammals. -

3112:

The species that have dozens of countries are problematic. I'm not sure what to do here. A human reader can just summarize them as "exists in most of southern Africa", but that's not an easy decision for the bot to

136:

I'm happy to help, but I need at least 2-3 weeks lead in to acquaint myself with the lit. I have some books, but I need to read them first before I can contribute in a meaningful sense. Same with any big project.

3078:

useful, and I hope to improve Polbot as I go. I'm also quite willing to have her fix the inevitable problems she creates if you let me know what they are (and if they can be fixed by simple repetitive changes).

1410:

says "beak" is "especially when strong and hooked as in a bird of prey" and "bill" is "especially when slender, flattened or weak, and in pigeons or web-footed birds". (Hey, where's my beloved Oxford comma?)

793:, which admittedly is a messy article but could have wider implications (eg Ravens in pop culture page for starters) - thus this could set some form of precedent so may be worth debating once and for all there 1371:

is preferred in the US and is where the Knowledge (XXG) article is. I don't care either way. So, vote away. BTW this is purely for the bird article, I don't wish this to be imposed throughout the rest of WP.

3257:(HBW) or the Passeridae (IUCN, ITIS)? If no one does, I'm going to put them back into Ploceidae, contrary to Polbot. And since people seem to classify these four genera together, do we need a stub on them? 1086:

Also, some people may want to consider listifying the "bird by country" categories and merging them into "bird by continent" or "bird by ecoregion" categories. The categories in some articles, such as

3175:

is fine; most of us only mark them higher for iconic species, or those with articles that have reached GA or FA status and obviously anything created by Polbot is unlikely to tick any of those boxes!

565:

Here are a couple of other sound files for comparison. Note that the first one (a Florida recording) has a funny bit at the end; this must be a regional thing, as I've never heard that before...

3266:, from "Social Weaver" to "Sociable Weaver". The latter name is much more common. Google results (including Scholar) available on request. Anyway, we have to do something about the fact that 207:" but Smith (1975) used anatomical, morphological and ethological characters to place it in the endemic New Zealand subfamily Strigopinae, which has usually been followed since (Turbott 1990)." 1263:

I've begun to clean Birds of the Seychelles, Madagascar and will be working on Fiji as well. The lists aren't bad, they just need a human touch and some illustartions. I'm more concerened by

790: 2678:

In a species article, they don't need the species—that's obvious too. Especially, in a species taxobox, the species is identified right above the picture, so it doesn't need to be below it.

3284:

I agree with your statements here and above about following HBW unless there is a good reason not to (in which case whoever has that reason can go ahead, be bold, and explain his changes).

3109:

By the way, if you want me to make taxonomic changes to taxoboxes in lots of articles, whether this involves articles Polbot made or not, that's fairly easy for me to do. Just let me know.

3095:(Passerines of Brazil? Parrots of Costa Rica?) I figure I can go back and replace "fauna of" with "birds of" for those countries with such categories. What do you guys think would be best? 919:

Greetings. Periodically I come across discussions on other taxonomic articles where people (usually non-scientists) want to capitalise the names. For example, there's a discussion over at

179: 1131: 151:

I'd love to help, but I warn you I'm not much use in this area - so I'll add bits and pieces, maybe help copyedit, and the like, but I very little about the origin of birds. Cheers,

1367:

and flick a coin and change it that way. Bill seems to be preferred in the UK (and British English is what the article bird is written in) and some of the ornithological community,

989: 1672:

There's a cats portal, a dogs portal - but no birds portal! We need one. Please comment. I'm willing to learn the code necessary to make pretty tables. I'll need backup, though. --

3445: 1713:. When it says "main article", shouldn't it just be a summary? I agree with the tag there: it's too long and should be summarized more briefly, with more info moved to sub pages. 2913: 1893:

Please move it back immediately! The subpages have been completed messed up! Don't worry - it's understood that it's under construction - it's in the under construction category!

615: 3399: 3333: 3293: 2705: 2439: 1450: 3106:, so I included that -- but I don't want to be misleading either and ascribe everything to habitat loss when other factors play a role. What's the best thing for Polbot to do? 2344:). Sorry, I misidentified it. Jim's got a starling book, so he might be the first to get to this one. If anyone wants to check my other identifications, that would be fine! 1466:

which didn't get beyond two contributions. I've copied it below. I'm going to assume that this is the main discussion, on the basis that it has the majority of contributions.

2794:

The monotypic genera/categories problem will stay with us for a long time. The rest will sort itself out to a point where it's a bit annoying at worst fairy quickly I think.

1756: 1276: 542: 3061: 2158: 2026: 1970: 1812: 1696: 3155: 1068: 146: 1239:

being created any time soon, I went ahead in filled in the gaps. I don't have any personal attachment to them so if you want to hack them about I won't be complaining.

175:

that I found in a bookshelf in my house. It's from 1980, so hopefully the information in it isn't outdated. (Hmm, expiration dates on books? Just like tomato sauce!) --

1005:

I added this sentence, "Also, this convention does not necessarily apply to articles on taxa other than birds," to the project page. We'll see whether it stays there.

2923:

genus pages should have as category: ], not ] <- actually, this might be more of a feature; it allows to check for monotypic genera to be fixed (usually, no genus

2115: 1785:

to FAC as by necessity it needs to be on the main page. I've had a bit of a look thus far....There is enough other material to go on a portal page already cheers,

1428:

I agree with MPF and Jim and add my opinion that in general, if there's a conflict, it's more important for an article to be well written than to be featured. But

1281:

I've started on the Morocco list (it being the destination of my last birding trip); as well as the list ordering, etc., I've also discovered from checking against

690:

The first should be merged into the second as they are synonymous and the second follows the correct style guideline....in fact I'll do that right now.....cheers,

3372: 3016: 2744: 3027:

parrots to Amazons - funny, it automatically made a couple as Amazons. I suppose it did help more than it guffed up but still a lot of checking to do...cheers,

97: 89: 84: 672:(basically, it crawls through IUCN redlist, and creates stubs where the articles do not exist), and came across this. There is now a Polbot-created article for 72: 67: 59: 1146:

Sounds good. Some of these already exist, and similar categories exist as regions. I'd recommend you work your new categories into the category hierarchy at

2099: 889:" for "working tirelessly" (cf. for example "Grasshopper and Ant" fable) which is a bit old-fashioned but still widely understood in Standard German today. 2655:

says "The word immediately following a hyphen in a species name is not capitalised; Red-winged Blackbird, Black-faced Butcherbird, Splendid Fairy-wren." –

1998:

OK, I added another 16 quotes, there's 20 total there now. The portal seems ready for prime-time. Will there be a big announcement when it goes public?

719:

99% of the current day birds. Every stub it creates has an infobox and a single reference, which can be used to flesh out the stub. Very handy, I think. –

3102:

IUCN data lists several reasons why a species might be threatened. Many are rather obscure to non-experts. The only one I saw we have an article for is

1716: 1126:

I'm in favor of that and Dr. Submillimeter at least has been. Thanks to Yomangani for taking a big step toward it. The discussion of similar ideas at

3404:

Yes, I'd be willing to have Polbot do this, but I'd need to know how to determine which should stay in Laridae and which should switch to Sternidae. –

962:

by definition, they are English-language only and "official" common names would end up duplicating the established Latin (scientific) names. (Also see

3425:

Next, countries that say anything like "vag." in the IUCN pages should be removed or noted as the results of vagrancy here. Does anyone else agree? —

1499: 1381: 533:

They are okay, but not flawless. Depends if it was classified by a field guy or someone in an office in Washington (former FWS volunteer speaking).

1533: 2508:

from your list, or is it time for those who know what they're doing to re-examine the lump? The AOU's South American check-list committee says, "

1201:

programmes are for personal use only, not for publishing spin-offs under free licenses. Should they all be deleted, and started over manually? -

2961: 2957: 2953: 2257: 1080: 1646:

Does the first section explain review species adequately for you?????? Let me know if you have additional questions or if I can help further.

2125:

to FA status for portal etc. It was the winner so it comes off the list. Sometimes collabs don't make it to be FAC ready and thats OK (like

1871: 2331: 1739:

The article is derived from the section in bird. However the main intention is to expand the new article, as well as reduce the section in

1317:

of errors—including many species marked as "rare/accidental" that are actually common (per field guides and personal experience). And, as

3408: 3385: 3342: 3315: 3164: 3042: 2948:

Here are the lists of Polbot created bird articles. According to some people the use of bots might help eliminate systematic problems...

2798: 2767: 2448: 2167: 2141: 1841: 1732: 1392: 1330: 1289: 560: 166: 240: 47: 17: 2575: 2263: 1532:

recently, necessitating further splitting. Sub-types by order seem to be the established pattern, and I've made a detailed proposal

1294:

Got the Moroccan one finished (thanks largely to the availability of the official Moroccan list on the web; turned out Painted Snipe

2267: 591: 176: 485: 322:

Of course all the above assumes that there is a single agreed scientific name for all species - definitely not the case for birds.

2163:

I might do an image of the emerging consensus on phylogeny so that we can replace the S/A image. Can anyone convert PNG into SVG?

849:

This behaviour was first described by Erwin Stresemann in German as einemsen in Ornithologische Monatsberichte XLIII. 138 in 1935.

2253: 2233: 1728: 1621:

Download the NJ State List PDF from the site. Unasterisked Review birds are accidental. Extinct birds are also indicated........

1441:

Now that I think about it, I wouldn't refer to an eagle having a bill or a warbler or a duck having a beak. I'll leave it alone.

1857:

has been initiated! Please come help me get it started. (Do not announce or link to the portal until it is complete, please.) --

484: 2845:

Google Scholar found two papers, neither of which it lets me read. Broders, Osborne, and Wink (2003) helpfully didn't analyze

2385: 2293: 2287: 2223: 2212:

I made a page for each one at Commons under the scientific name. Those pages include the author, so you can look it up there.

1079:

I was thinking about starting a few categories for birds that are endemic to specific countries, islands, etc., starting with

982:

thing I'd want to depend on the scientific community for would be advice on spelling, grammar, punctuation, or capitalization.

3038: 2811:, following the IUCN (and in agreement with Zimmerman, Turner, and Pearson, and that Firefly Encyclopedia I often quote) but 2763: 2138: 1838: 1794: 1177: 1127: 808: 701: 2652: 2187: 1486:, although I personally prefer bill. At this point I don't care though. What should we use? If no consensus emerges I shall 3307:". Does anyone know what that reference supports? The unpopular choice of English name? There's an identical comment at 1176:, etc., etc.) need a lot of rearranging and spellchecking to bring them into AERC standard order and orthography (see e.g. 3205:

On reasons for rarity, I'd say put them in the articles. Use your judgement or ask for help on which should be redlinked.

2570:. I've done this now, no problem. (If anyone has similar requests, let me know.) But lots of other articles still link to 2355: 2351: 2327: 2323: 2307: 1236: 3146:. Any chance you can change the instances of Acanthizidae to what we use for the genus and species articles you created? 1958: 1482:

We use both (as noted in the peer review). We should probably pick one and go with it. The Knowledge (XXG) article is at

2297: 1227: 978:

1. As much as I may respect the profession, having known and worked with quite a few scientists in my time, I think the

718:

common name and few redirects. Soon there will be stubs for all the species in IUCN Redlist, which I suppose means : -->

203:

A parrot apart: the natural history of the kakapo (Strigops habroptilus), and the context of its conservation management

3440: 3394: 3367: 3328: 3288: 3150: 3056: 3011: 2908: 2836:

Pfff... I think there is a paper around somewhere on bustard phylogeny and systematics. Not sure; try Google Scholar.

2739: 2700: 2593: 2434: 2405: 2395: 2375: 2153: 2110: 2055: 2021: 1965: 1807: 1751: 1691: 1494: 1445: 1376: 1310: 1271: 1063: 610: 537: 159: 141: 3390:

I don't think there are that many, but I guess we could ask. It isn't a simple all laridae = Sternidae thing though.

2735:

and put all the scrub-robin articles it created there. Which genus do we want to use? I don't know my scrub-robins.

3363:, which i find somewhat gulling. Anyone want to skim through these and tern them into respectable Sternidae pages? 3048: 2937:"Source" - technically that's indeed correct, but for thee ase of later maintenance, "References" would be better. 2317: 1147: 38: 1357:

was the inconsistent usage of bill or beak. I need to pick one and make it consistent throughout the article. So,

2630: 2365: 2347: 2283: 2243: 3220: 2601: 2597: 2313: 1577: 1173: 2341: 830:

as they are/were considered anything from sacred to an unclean pest by different cultures at different times.

994:

Also, in Britain, much literature uses the initial capital naming convention for moths, dragonflies, plants.

362:

As it is, the article can probably act as a general article with subsection etting into separate article for

202: 3083:

taxonomy, I'm just using IUCN info, which is not uncontroversial but not markedly wrong either, apparently.

1829:

I'll help out when I can. It is starting to look alot more polished so I dips me lid off to ya....cheers,

1235:

has had to make so many corrections. They obviously need some work, but since I couldn't see, for example,

680:(Lagopus leucurus). I would assume there simply was a typo in IUCN Redlist... or is L.leucura used, too? – 3437: 3391: 3364: 3325: 3285: 3147: 3053: 3008: 2905: 2736: 2697: 2559: 2431: 2239: 2150: 2107: 2048: 2018: 1962: 1804: 1748: 1688: 1634:, but I'm not sure how reliable it is. There is, however, a large bibliography that goes with the site. -- 1491: 1442: 1373: 1268: 1169: 1096: 1060: 841: 677: 673: 607: 534: 152: 138: 2149:

is the current winner of the colab of the month. Please check out the talk page to see what needs doing.

1961:, this isn't publicity, just what they ask of even unfinished portals apparently. Nice job Birdman, btw. 507:

I'm not sure it's a goldfinch of any sort. To me, this sounds suspiciously like a Prothonotary Warbler.

3219:

I've finished the birds now. Polbot created over 5,000 articles on bird species. They are all listed at

2804: 2634: 2277: 2229: 2219: 1045:

Wonder if there is support for bot archival for this page. Seems to have become one of the most active

3469: 3459: 3429: 3278: 3227: 3213: 3183: 3132: 3128:

Are there other suggested improvements? Please let me know. (I've added this page to my watchlist.) –

3074:

Greetings! I was just made aware of this thread, and thought I would comment here. This discussion is

2941: 2898: 2883: 2869: 2840: 2831: 2690: 2659: 2645: 2616: 2582: 2548: 2534: 2488: 2466: 2457: 2424: 2194: 2088: 2071: 2062: 2042: 2012: 2002: 1989: 1934: 1909: 1899: 1878: 1861: 1797: 1772: 1676: 1650: 1638: 1625: 1616: 1607: 1592: 1565: 1551: 1540: 1509: 1470: 1436: 1401: 1302: 1258: 1218: 1205: 1195: 1184: 1154: 1138: 1117: 1099: 1053: 1032: 1018: 998: 970: 956: 942: 906: 893: 873: 863: 834: 812: 779: 755: 723: 705: 684: 654: 633: 598: 528: 515: 501: 470: 450: 440: 437: 423: 398: 356: 326: 305: 283: 270: 247: 229: 130: 3381:

Okay, I confess I have no enthusiasm for such a project, but can't the bot do it? Have you asked? —

3321: 2938: 2895: 2861:. Anyway, all either of these papers are based on is the cytochrome b gene&don't get me started. 2837: 2795: 2600:

was still showing as a red-link. However, I've discovered that Polbot has created an article called

2164: 1724: 1548: 890: 831: 752: 651: 595: 1682:

They've recently done one over at Dino which made me think we could do one too. I was waiting until

2401: 1525: 1256: 280: 244: 2516:

in some classifications (e.g., AOU 1983), but Payne & Risley (1976) and Payne (1979) retained

1462:

There appear to have been two parallel discussions initiaited on this - the one above, and one at

462:

news story about Argentavis magnificens which for some reason hasn't been added to this proj. See

383: 3426: 3382: 3339: 3312: 3275: 3262: 3237:

Anyone have any strong opinions on whether the eight species in the aptly named Plocepasserinae (

3210: 3091:

should have Polbot redirect all genera it think have a single species, even if it might be wrong?

3032: 2968: 2880: 2866: 2828: 2757: 2687: 2545: 2463: 2445: 2421: 2391: 2134: 1931: 1875: 1834: 1790: 1433: 1298:

on the list, but several others weren't and came out). Only another 50 or so more to do . . .! -

1165: 1135: 1132:

Knowledge (XXG):Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_March_8#Category:Fauna_of_Europe_subcategories

1015: 953: 882: 802: 695: 630: 387: 363: 2823:). So should we just stick with the way we've got thing? I'm happy to change that species to 371: 2371: 2303: 1429: 2904:

I suggested to Quadell that he consult a little more. And I brought up some of these issues.

2186:. I would appreciate any assistance in improving it in the hope of getting it somewhere near 1487: 1419:: a strong short broad bill" and defines "bill" as the generic term. I'll let you check the 1363: 1095:, almost look like spam. (Pick out the category for the birds of Egypt in either article.) 935: 930: 925: 827: 118: 3180: 2642: 2613: 2337: 1327: 1114: 1029: 967: 939: 557: 512: 353: 302: 267: 224: 114: 1046: 3299: 3000: 2992: 2982: 2381: 1999: 1720: 1585: 1092: 1088: 720: 681: 463: 122: 107: 205:", and its chapter on taxonomy states that it is in the subfamily Strigopinae. Verbatim, 3260:

While I'm at it, I'd like to propose a change in the common name we have for a species,

3202:

Are you already changing "in montanes" to "in montane forests" or "in mountain forests"?

2430:

Very cool. The birding in Kenya is fantastic, but that could be said of most of Africa.

1643: 2454: 1710: 1706: 1562: 1398: 1251: 1232: 1215: 1211: 1192: 570: 568: 525: 498: 420: 323: 1150:, being mindful of the distinction between an endemic and a restricted-range endemic. 3338:

Thanks. I just realized I could see who added those notes, and it was indeed him. —

3267: 3028: 2753: 2191: 2183: 2130: 2039: 2009: 1986: 1906: 1896: 1858: 1830: 1786: 1769: 1673: 1647: 1635: 1622: 1613: 1604: 1589: 950: 798: 774: 766: 691: 627: 467: 412: 3466: 3456: 3419: 3405: 3308: 3224: 3161: 3143: 3139: 3129: 3117:

blank? (By the way, I added the "needs-photo" parameter to the template. You like?)

3103: 3004: 2986: 2934:"Forest - Montane" habitat on redlist gives an output of "its habitat is montanes". 2731: 2656: 2579: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2361: 2126: 2081: 2068: 1854: 1050: 903: 870: 860: 669: 647: 447: 395: 127: 2971:

has the common name of the family in the intro line (many don't), it reads as The

2857:. However, Pitra et al. (which I also can't read) doesn't give a hit on the word 822:. I don't think it has been discussed for a bird article yet (but what do I know). 818:

There is a savage debate on-again off-again regarding thew cultural references in

751:

If in doubt, Zoonomen (see links on project page) usually can resolve the issue.

3311:, which also has another English name (the misleading "Scaly-feathered Finch"). — 1412: 986: 744:

is transcribed directly from Ancient Greek and not Latinized. See footnote under

483: 3176: 2722: 2717: 2638: 2609: 2249: 1323: 1264: 1110: 963: 714: 665: 553: 508: 349: 298: 263: 220: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

436:

How bout we start trying to get pictures of the species eggs on bird articles?

3415: 2531: 2500: 2485: 2453:

Of those still left I'll do the dove, kingfisher, boubou, weaver and lapwing.

2408:). Many authorities consider the East African population a separate species, 2017:

looks good to me, only thing is perhaps we need a bit of variety for the pic?

1601: 1506: 1467: 1151: 995: 819: 773:

Congratulations, all! What a beautiful article! Keep up the great work. Best,

416: 375: 2894:

or we'll be wasting our time on cleanup til the WP server park freezes over.

3254: 2803:

Naturally there are problems with classification. For instance, it created

2085: 1537: 1476: 1463: 745: 490: 379: 2637:? If the latter, we'll need to change all the appropriate Africa lists... 2562:, above, asked me if I could get Polbot to change all references to family 1432:

is not necessarily good style. I hope that's contradictory enough. :-) —

1267:

creating bird stubs using a taxonomy we don't than I am about these lists.

407:

I don't like the idea of a disamb, otherwise you end up with the lunacy of

2696:

I agree, though I think I've been guilty of putting the name in the past.

2522: 2215:

I'm going to upload a couple more pictures, but this will do for a start:

2784: 1389: 1318: 1299: 1286: 1202: 1181: 279:

Not what I'm saying at all. Please read it again, and carefully. Thanks.

3086:

Now I'd like to address some of the concerns here, and ask for advice.

1631: 1612:

Thanks, but that doesn't include whether a bird is accidental or not. --

171:

I added a bit on the "Trees-down" or "ground-up"? debate from a copy of

3360: 3298:

Okay. I was going to be bold, but 1) Polbot anticipated me by created

2812: 1361:: which is it going to b?. If no clear consensus is arrived at I'll be 646:

Hi folks, I have started to discuss the new penguin paper from PNAS at

411:, where a simple word is disambed beyond all logic - is my chicken egg 367: 1905:

I have moved it back. I know you meant well, but please be careful! --

1010:

By the way, some publications on birds, such as the American magazine

494: 3303: 3271: 2273: 2047:

It's beautiful. Nice work, and thanks to everyone involved! Cheers,

198: 190: 3359:

Polbot has created the tern articles with all of them as members of

2444:

Well, I had fun. I think this is everything. Next: id requests. —

2067:

Oh, it is nice. Don't we close this page and move to the new home ?

1709:, and that section seems like a copy or mirror of an old version of 197:

Hello there. I originally posted this question on the talk page of

2849:, but say that Pitra, Lieckfeldt, Frahnert, Fickel placed it with 2608:, should I redirect that one to make the capitalization standard? 391: 390:. Either that or a full-scale disambiguation page. Note also that 343:

I'm about to start a massive expansion of the woefully inadequate

2540:

No, I meant that Clements, the AOU, and the AOU's SACC all split

1313:

list, which was also based on Avibase, and have been finding all

2752:

NFI. I'd better have a look at the contributions.......cheers,

2146: 2122: 2103: 1782: 1744: 1740: 1702: 1683: 1483: 1368: 1354: 920: 344: 214: 847:

Can some ornithologist who sprichts German check the article.

3306:

has a comment at that species, "

2520:

on the basis of skeletal differences <check Adams 1955: -->

1421: 924:

each species. What is frustrating for me is seeing people use

899: 521: 408: 210: 25: 1957:

I've added content to the portal. I also left a ref to it at

2629:, which should probably be standardized as well. And is it 2504:(defying not only Clements but the AOU). Should you delete 2494:

While picking low-hanging fruit, I noticed that we submerge

2098:

I've been a bit vague and the time for choosing next months

2544:. We and HBW don't. But I agree with your suggestion. — 2121:

The more I think about it the more I think we need to get

2827:, but we won't find all of these till we see the list. — 2102:

has past. Still there is a clear winner for May, and its

664:

I have been slowly going through the articles created by

126:

spiff this article up would be tremendously appreciated!

869:

On second look, it is perhaps ok. Added a de interwiki.

173:

The Audubon Society Encyclopedia of North American Birds

2592:

I noticed (while taking a look at the work-in-progress

1075:

Endemic bird categories and overall category suggestion

1353:

One of the comments generated from the peer review of

2462:

Sorry, I missed that when I wrote Tropical Boubou. —

938:

that you're free to reference. Thanks so much! Neale

209:

It then goes to explain the similarities between the

3465:

Wow, my brain is hurting from all these puns, haha.

2675:

They don't need "Image" or "Picture"—that's obvious.

1059:

Sounds good to me. This page needs archiving badly.

606:

Sounds hoaxy to me, I'd remove it pending a source.

1701:Speaking of which, there is a lot of repetition on 2927:should be listed in family categories, only genus 2716:Most of you are probably aware of the impact that 2604:. Since the other night-herons are all listed as 898:Thanks, sounds like a nice bit that could go into 789:Dear all, there is a debate going on at AfA about 493:articles this belongs to. Original clip came form 446::) Getting pictures of the birds is hard enough ! 2574:, many in lists of birds in various regions. See 1244:The following species have been recorded recently 915:Ring-fence the naming convention to *just* birds 676:(Lagopus leucura) and a much longer article for 1180:, which is correct). Anyone want a big job? - 552:recorded. That can be important information! 2200:Want to write an article about a Kenyan bird? 2084:is cool! And I add interwiki to Portal:Birds. 8: 1630:Where do you see that it says that? I found 736:Actually, no (but it's entirely excusable). 3455:Okay, that's now on Polbot's todo list. – 3171::I think marking your stub creations with 3142:, we still consider it a subfamily of the 2729:, Polbot created an article for the genus 2578:for a list. Should there be a redirect? – 121:editors not neglect concept articles like 3124:Is Polbot doing the "synonyms" correctly? 1874:until it's ready for public consumption. 3047:Gonna have to check the ranges too. The 2209:by Tony Harris is searchable at Amazon. 1872:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Birds/Portal 1781:I think the best thing, then, is to get 586:Somebody has added a "Japanese Turkey, 489:- I need to identify which of the four 1242:By the way, the British list mentions 1081:Category:Endemic birds of South Africa 785:AfD discussion with wider implications 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Birds 7: 1134:got a little acrimonious, though. — 626:Patent nonsense. I've removed it. - 378:is more semantic than anything...), 1515:Projects, review announcements, etc 885:(IIRC) term for "ant" whence also " 2919:More bugs (easy to fix methinks): 2576:Special:Whatlinkshere/Acanthizidae 2566:in the articles Polbot created to 2264:Greater Blue-eared Glossy Starling 1747:is pretty much a summary, though. 1083:. Does anyone have any comments? 239:Having read most of this exchange 24: 3274:, an article where "]" occurs. — 3160:I'll add it to her To-do list. – 3138:5 - We don't have an article for 2967:Another problem I just noticed - 1490:, flick a coin and go with that. 1425:and anything else you might have. 592:Late Quaternary prehistoric birds 1959:Knowledge (XXG):Portal/Directory 1246:, it might help to clarify when 1160:List of birds of Xxxxx (country) 481: 29: 2294:Eastern Double-collared Sunbird 1164:The lists for countries in the 3320:I suggest taking that up with 3023:I changed all the autocreated 2129:) we'll do it later. cheers, 1743:a bit. The current section in 1388:enforce any definitive use. - 1178:List of birds of Great Britain 1128:Category_talk:Biota_by_country 660:Lagopus leucurus vs. L.leucura 106:Anyone want to collaborate on 1: 2324:Northern White-crowned Shrike 1237:List of birds of Burkina Faso 795:(has it been debated before?) 520:Really? I'd figured that the 1602:New Jersey Records Committee 1422:American Heritage Dictionary 1228:List of birds of Puerto Rico 1105:I think that once we have a 524:would be a reliable source. 2594:List of birds of The Gambia 2523:Tentative S. Am. check-list 3486: 3470:02:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC) 3460:01:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC) 3446:21:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC) 3430:15:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC) 3409:11:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC) 3400:05:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC) 3386:04:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC) 3378:It does seem a bit skuaed. 3049:Black-billed Shrike-tyrant 2779:actually be cool. I mean, 2588:Night-Heron or Night-heron 2352:picture with emerald spots 2168:09:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 2159:01:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC) 2142:07:45, 26 April 2007 (UTC) 2116:06:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC) 2094:Collaboration of the Month 1971:05:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 1935:11:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC) 1910:22:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 1900:22:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 1879:22:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 1862:22:24, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 1842:06:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 1813:04:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 1798:04:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 1773:02:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 1757:23:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1733:23:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1697:00:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC) 1677:23:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC) 1651:21:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1639:18:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1626:17:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1617:15:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1608:14:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1593:20:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1566:10:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC) 1552:20:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 1541:18:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC) 1148:Category:Endemism in birds 477:Need to identify soundfile 366:(? The difference between 3373:02:02, 31 July 2007 (UTC) 3355:One good Tern desreves... 3343:02:48, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 3334:02:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 3316:02:37, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 3294:22:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3279:21:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3228:00:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC) 3214:05:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3184:02:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3165:03:08, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3156:02:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3133:02:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3062:01:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 3043:21:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 3017:19:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2942:17:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2914:19:47, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2899:16:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2884:15:20, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2870:16:48, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 2841:16:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2832:15:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2799:14:58, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2768:02:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2745:01:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2706:21:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC) 2691:15:08, 29 July 2007 (UTC) 2660:22:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 2646:22:19, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 2631:White-crested Tiger-Heron 2617:22:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 2583:22:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC) 2549:23:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 2535:22:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 2489:21:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC) 2467:14:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC) 2458:07:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 2449:16:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 2440:21:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 2425:18:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 2348:Emerald-spotted Wood Dove 2284:Grey-headed Social-weaver 2089:16:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 2072:03:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 2063:00:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 2043:22:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 2027:22:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2013:22:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 2003:15:20, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 1510:06:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1500:02:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1471:09:02, 24 July 2007 (UTC) 1451:03:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC) 1437:16:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1402:12:32, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1393:08:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1382:08:00, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1331:08:00, 24 July 2007 (UTC) 1309:I've been working on the 1303:15:05, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1290:08:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1277:23:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1259:22:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1219:10:19, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1206:09:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1196:05:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1185:00:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1155:22:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1139:16:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1118:21:22, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1100:20:03, 22 July 2007 (UTC) 1069:07:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC) 1054:14:22, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 1033:15:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 1019:14:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 999:12:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 990:11:51, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 971:12:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 957:10:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 943:09:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 907:14:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC) 894:17:29, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 874:07:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC) 864:07:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC) 835:17:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 813:04:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 780:11:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 756:15:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 724:12:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 706:11:29, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 685:08:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC) 451:04:38, 30 June 2007 (UTC) 441:03:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC) 424:06:03, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 399:23:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 357:22:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 327:06:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC) 306:22:57, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 284:22:49, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 271:13:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 248:11:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC) 230:19:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC) 180:23:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 167:21:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 147:10:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 131:09:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC) 3221:User:Polbot/taxa listing 2712:Polbot and the aftermath 2602:White-backed Night-heron 2598:White-backed Night-Heron 2314:Yellow-throated Longclaw 2207:Shrikes and Bush-shrikes 1990:14:33, 19 May 2007 (UTC) 1578:List of New Jersey birds 1174:List of birds of Morocco 791:Lions in popular culture 655:16:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC) 634:11:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 616:05:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 599:04:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 561:10:16, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 543:10:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 529:08:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC) 516:18:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC) 502:05:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC) 471:23:47, 2 July 2007 (UTC) 394:will have to be merged. 2879:others may disagree. — 2334:showing gregariousness) 2195:11:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC) 1210:they were generated by 2809:Eupodotis melanogaster 2240:Northern Anteater-Chat 2182:I have just rewritten 1170:List of birds of Spain 842:Anting (bird activity) 776:Firsfron of Ronchester 678:White-tailed Ptarmigan 674:White-Tailed Ptarmigan 457:Argentavis magnificens 235:First line: think big! 3324:, that is his style. 2999:is a species in the 2989:family. It should be 2978:Cardinalis phoeniceus 2817:Lissotis melanogaster 2805:Black-bellied Bustard 2686:What do you think? — 2635:White-crested Bittern 2560:User:Sabine's Sunbird 2512:has been included in 2230:White-bellied Bustard 2220:Black-bellied Bustard 1719:comment was added by 881:is correct, from the 42:of past discussions. 3070:The bot-owner speaks 2666:Caption suggestions 2402:Black-lored Babbler 2008:be welcome. Yay! -- 1561:me, I just destub. 1526:Category:Bird stubs 1520:Bird stubs by order 588:Meleagris japonicus 117:has suggested that 3263:Philetairus socius 3253:) belong with the 2981:) is a species of 2973:Vermilion Cardinal 2392:Striped Kingfisher 2328:picture (not mine) 1930:Sorry about that. 1588:). Please help. -- 1166:Western Palearctic 883:Middle High German 855:or something like 582:"Japanese turkey"? 547:I would certainly 260:Turdus migratorius 256:Erithacus rubecula 3418:and I just fixed 2819:(following HBW? 2479:Bird genera to do 2410:Turdoides sharpei 2372:Long-toed Lapwing 2304:Bar-tailed Trogon 1870:I've moved it to 1736: 1430:elegant variation 1097:Dr. Submillimeter 769:on the main page! 486: 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 3477: 3443: 3438:Sabine's Sunbird 3397: 3392:Sabine's Sunbird 3370: 3365:Sabine's Sunbird 3331: 3326:Sabine's Sunbird 3291: 3286:Sabine's Sunbird 3153: 3148:Sabine's Sunbird 3059: 3054:Sabine's Sunbird 3014: 3009:Sabine's Sunbird 2991:is a species of 2911: 2906:Sabine's Sunbird 2865:to change it. — 2787:is now actually 2742: 2737:Sabine's Sunbird 2703: 2698:Sabine's Sunbird 2437: 2432:Sabine's Sunbird 2338:Wattled Starling 2258:picture of chick 2156: 2151:Sabine's Sunbird 2113: 2108:Sabine's Sunbird 2060: 2053: 2024: 2019:Sabine's Sunbird 1968: 1963:Sabine's Sunbird 1810: 1805:Sabine's Sunbird 1754: 1749:Sabine's Sunbird 1714: 1694: 1689:Sabine's Sunbird 1497: 1492:Sabine's Sunbird 1448: 1443:Sabine's Sunbird 1415:says "beak" is " 1379: 1374:Sabine's Sunbird 1274: 1269:Sabine's Sunbird 1254: 1066: 1061:Sabine's Sunbird 777: 613: 608:Sabine's Sunbird 540: 535:Sabine's Sunbird 488: 487: 464:Talk: Argentavis 164: 157: 144: 139:Sabine's Sunbird 115:User:John.Conway 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 3485: 3484: 3480: 3479: 3478: 3476: 3475: 3474: 3441: 3395: 3368: 3357: 3329: 3322:Dysmorodrepanis 3300:Sociable Weaver 3289: 3235: 3233:Plocepasserinae 3151: 3072: 3057: 3012: 2983:cardinal (bird) 2939:Dysmorodrepanis 2909: 2896:Dysmorodrepanis 2838:Dysmorodrepanis 2796:Dysmorodrepanis 2740: 2725:already, genus 2714: 2701: 2668: 2590: 2557: 2481: 2435: 2382:Tropical Boubou 2356:sharper picture 2202: 2188:feature article 2180: 2165:Dysmorodrepanis 2154: 2111: 2096: 2056: 2049: 2022: 1966: 1808: 1752: 1715:—The preceding 1692: 1670: 1586:Atlantic Puffin 1581: 1549:Dysmorodrepanis 1522: 1517: 1495: 1446: 1413:Merriam-Webster 1377: 1359:straw poll time 1351: 1272: 1252: 1162: 1093:Lesser Flamingo 1089:Ortolan Bunting 1077: 1064: 1043: 917: 891:Dysmorodrepanis 845: 832:Dysmorodrepanis 787: 775: 771: 753:Dysmorodrepanis 662: 652:Dysmorodrepanis 644: 611: 596:Dysmorodrepanis 584: 538: 482: 479: 459: 434: 341: 237: 195: 160: 153: 142: 123:origin of birds 112: 108:Origin of birds 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 3483: 3481: 3473: 3472: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3449: 3448: 3434: 3433: 3432: 3423: 3379: 3356: 3353: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3234: 3231: 3217: 3216: 3206: 3203: 3200: 3196: 3192: 3187: 3186: 3173:importance=Low 3169: 3168: 3167: 3126: 3125: 3122: 3118: 3114: 3110: 3107: 3100: 3096: 3092: 3071: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3064: 2965: 2964: 2946: 2945: 2935: 2932: 2917: 2916: 2891: 2890: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2862: 2792: 2773: 2772: 2771: 2770: 2713: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2684: 2683: 2679: 2676: 2667: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2653:this guideline 2589: 2586: 2556: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2527: 2526: 2480: 2477: 2476: 2475: 2474: 2473: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2418: 2417: 2399: 2389: 2379: 2376:blurry picture 2369: 2359: 2345: 2335: 2321: 2311: 2301: 2291: 2281: 2271: 2261: 2247: 2237: 2227: 2201: 2198: 2179: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2095: 2092: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2029: 1992: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1946: 1945: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1937: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1913: 1912: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1865: 1864: 1851: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1776: 1775: 1764: 1763: 1762: 1761: 1760: 1759: 1711:Bird evolution 1707:Bird evolution 1669: 1666: 1664: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1632:another source 1610: 1600:Try this link 1580: 1575: 1573: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1568: 1555: 1554: 1521: 1518: 1516: 1513: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1454: 1453: 1426: 1350: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1240: 1212:user:Yomangani 1161: 1158: 1144: 1143: 1142: 1141: 1121: 1120: 1076: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1042: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1022: 1021: 1007: 1006: 983: 976: 975: 974: 973: 916: 913: 912: 911: 910: 909: 896: 844: 839: 838: 837: 823: 786: 783: 770: 764: 763: 762: 761: 760: 759: 758: 749: 729: 728: 727: 726: 709: 708: 661: 658: 643: 640: 639: 638: 637: 636: 621: 620: 619: 618: 583: 580: 579: 578: 577: 576: 575: 574: 573: 572: 566: 563: 478: 475: 474: 473: 458: 455: 454: 453: 433: 430: 429: 428: 427: 426: 402: 401: 340: 337: 336: 335: 334: 333: 332: 331: 330: 329: 313: 312: 311: 310: 309: 308: 289: 288: 287: 286: 274: 273: 236: 233: 228: 194: 188: 187: 186: 185: 184: 183: 182: 111: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3482: 3471: 3468: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3461: 3458: 3447: 3444: 3439: 3435: 3431: 3428: 3427:JerryFriedman 3424: 3421: 3417: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3407: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3398: 3393: 3389: 3388: 3387: 3384: 3383:JerryFriedman 3380: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3374: 3371: 3366: 3362: 3354: 3344: 3341: 3340:JerryFriedman 3337: 3336: 3335: 3332: 3327: 3323: 3319: 3318: 3317: 3314: 3313:JerryFriedman 3310: 3305: 3301: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3292: 3287: 3283: 3282: 3281: 3280: 3277: 3276:JerryFriedman 3273: 3270:redirects to 3269: 3268:Social Weaver 3265: 3264: 3258: 3256: 3252: 3251:Pseudonigrita 3248: 3244: 3240: 3232: 3230: 3229: 3226: 3222: 3215: 3212: 3211:JerryFriedman 3207: 3204: 3201: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3188: 3185: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3166: 3163: 3159: 3158: 3157: 3154: 3149: 3145: 3141: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3134: 3131: 3123: 3119: 3115: 3111: 3108: 3105: 3101: 3097: 3093: 3089: 3088: 3087: 3084: 3080: 3077: 3069: 3063: 3060: 3055: 3050: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3040: 3037: 3034: 3030: 3026: 3022: 3021: 3020: 3019: 3018: 3015: 3010: 3006: 3002: 2997:or better as 2996: 2994: 2988: 2984: 2980: 2979: 2974: 2970: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2943: 2940: 2936: 2933: 2930: 2929:subcategories 2926: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2915: 2912: 2907: 2903: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2897: 2885: 2882: 2881:JerryFriedman 2877: 2871: 2868: 2867:JerryFriedman 2863: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2848: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2839: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2830: 2829:JerryFriedman 2826: 2822: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2797: 2793: 2790: 2786: 2783:cool... hey, 2782: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2774: 2769: 2765: 2762: 2759: 2755: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2746: 2743: 2738: 2734: 2733: 2728: 2724: 2719: 2711: 2707: 2704: 2699: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2689: 2688:JerryFriedman 2680: 2677: 2674: 2673: 2672: 2665: 2661: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2644: 2640: 2636: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2621:We also have 2619: 2618: 2615: 2611: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2595: 2587: 2585: 2584: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2569: 2565: 2561: 2554: 2550: 2547: 2546:JerryFriedman 2543: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2536: 2533: 2524: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2502: 2497: 2493: 2492: 2491: 2490: 2487: 2478: 2468: 2465: 2464:JerryFriedman 2461: 2460: 2459: 2456: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2447: 2446:JerryFriedman 2443: 2442: 2441: 2438: 2433: 2429: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2423: 2422:JerryFriedman 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2400: 2397: 2393: 2390: 2387: 2383: 2380: 2377: 2373: 2370: 2367: 2363: 2360: 2357: 2353: 2349: 2346: 2343: 2339: 2336: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2322: 2319: 2315: 2312: 2309: 2305: 2302: 2299: 2295: 2292: 2289: 2285: 2282: 2279: 2275: 2272: 2269: 2265: 2262: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2248: 2245: 2241: 2238: 2235: 2231: 2228: 2225: 2221: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2213: 2210: 2208: 2199: 2197: 2196: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2178:Pigeon racing 2177: 2169: 2166: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2157: 2152: 2148: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2140: 2136: 2132: 2128: 2124: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2114: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2100:collaboration 2093: 2091: 2090: 2087: 2083: 2073: 2070: 2066: 2065: 2064: 2061: 2059: 2054: 2052: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2041: 2036: 2028: 2025: 2020: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2011: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2001: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1991: 1988: 1972: 1969: 1964: 1960: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1936: 1933: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1911: 1908: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1898: 1894: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1880: 1877: 1873: 1869: 1868: 1867: 1866: 1863: 1860: 1856: 1853: 1852: 1843: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1827: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1814: 1811: 1806: 1801: 1800: 1799: 1796: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1774: 1771: 1766: 1765: 1758: 1755: 1750: 1746: 1742: 1738: 1737: 1734: 1730: 1726: 1722: 1718: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1699: 1698: 1695: 1690: 1685: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1675: 1667: 1665: 1652: 1649: 1645: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1637: 1633: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1624: 1620: 1619: 1618: 1615: 1611: 1609: 1606: 1603: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1594: 1591: 1587: 1579: 1576: 1574: 1567: 1564: 1559: 1558: 1557: 1556: 1553: 1550: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1519: 1514: 1512: 1511: 1508: 1502: 1501: 1498: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1480: 1478: 1475:Copied from 1473: 1472: 1469: 1465: 1452: 1449: 1444: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1435: 1434:JerryFriedman 1431: 1427: 1424: 1423: 1418: 1414: 1409: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1400: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1391: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1380: 1375: 1370: 1366: 1365: 1360: 1356: 1348: 1332: 1329: 1325: 1320: 1316: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1301: 1297: 1293: 1292: 1291: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1279: 1278: 1275: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1261: 1260: 1257: 1255: 1249: 1245: 1241: 1238: 1234: 1229: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1217: 1213: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1204: 1199: 1198: 1197: 1194: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1167: 1159: 1157: 1156: 1153: 1149: 1140: 1137: 1136:JerryFriedman 1133: 1129: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1119: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1084: 1082: 1074: 1070: 1067: 1062: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1052: 1049:talk pages ! 1048: 1040: 1034: 1031: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1020: 1017: 1016:JerryFriedman 1013: 1009: 1008: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 997: 992: 991: 988: 981: 972: 969: 965: 960: 959: 958: 955: 952: 947: 946: 945: 944: 941: 937: 932: 927: 922: 914: 908: 905: 901: 897: 895: 892: 888: 884: 880: 877: 876: 875: 872: 868: 867: 866: 865: 862: 858: 854: 850: 843: 840: 836: 833: 829: 824: 821: 817: 816: 815: 814: 810: 807: 804: 800: 796: 792: 784: 782: 781: 778: 768: 767:Mourning Dove 765: 757: 754: 750: 747: 743: 739: 735: 734: 733: 732: 731: 730: 725: 722: 716: 713: 712: 711: 710: 707: 703: 700: 697: 693: 689: 688: 687: 686: 683: 679: 675: 671: 667: 659: 657: 656: 653: 649: 641: 635: 632: 629: 625: 624: 623: 622: 617: 614: 609: 605: 604: 603: 602: 601: 600: 597: 593: 589: 581: 571: 569: 567: 564: 562: 559: 555: 550: 546: 545: 544: 541: 536: 532: 531: 530: 527: 523: 519: 518: 517: 514: 510: 506: 505: 504: 503: 500: 496: 492: 476: 472: 469: 465: 461: 460: 456: 452: 449: 445: 444: 443: 442: 439: 431: 425: 422: 418: 414: 413:egg (biology) 410: 406: 405: 404: 403: 400: 397: 393: 389: 385: 381: 377: 373: 369: 365: 361: 360: 359: 358: 355: 351: 346: 338: 328: 325: 321: 320: 319: 318: 317: 316: 315: 314: 307: 304: 300: 295: 294: 293: 292: 291: 290: 285: 282: 278: 277: 276: 275: 272: 269: 265: 261: 257: 252: 251: 250: 249: 246: 242: 234: 232: 231: 226: 222: 218: 216: 212: 208: 204: 200: 192: 189: 181: 178: 174: 170: 169: 168: 165: 163: 158: 156: 150: 149: 148: 145: 140: 135: 134: 133: 132: 129: 124: 120: 116: 109: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 3454: 3420:Lesser Noddy 3358: 3309:Scaly Weaver 3261: 3259: 3250: 3246: 3242: 3238: 3236: 3218: 3172: 3144:Pardalotidae 3140:Acanthizidae 3127: 3104:habitat loss 3085: 3081: 3075: 3073: 3035: 3024: 3005:Cardinalidae 2998: 2990: 2987:Cardinalidae 2977: 2976: 2972: 2969:this article 2966: 2947: 2928: 2924: 2918: 2892: 2858: 2854: 2850: 2846: 2824: 2820: 2816: 2815:lists it as 2808: 2788: 2780: 2760: 2732:Erythropygia 2730: 2727:Cercotrichas 2726: 2715: 2685: 2669: 2627:Tiger-herons 2626: 2623:Tiger Herons 2622: 2620: 2605: 2591: 2572:Acanthizidae 2568:Pardalotidae 2564:Acanthizidae 2558: 2555:Acanthizidae 2541: 2528: 2517: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2499: 2495: 2482: 2419: 2413: 2412:rather than 2409: 2362:Taita Fiscal 2214: 2211: 2206: 2203: 2184:this article 2181: 2127:Common Raven 2097: 2082:Portal:Birds 2080: 2057: 2050: 1983: 1932:Andy Mabbett 1892: 1891: 1876:Andy Mabbett 1855:Portal:Birds 1671: 1668:Birds Portal 1663: 1582: 1572: 1529: 1524:The size of 1523: 1503: 1481: 1474: 1461: 1420: 1416: 1407: 1362: 1358: 1352: 1349:Beak or bill 1314: 1295: 1282: 1247: 1243: 1163: 1145: 1106: 1085: 1078: 1044: 1041:Bot archival 1011: 993: 979: 977: 918: 886: 878: 856: 852: 848: 846: 805: 794: 788: 772: 741: 740:is correct: 737: 698: 668:operated by 663: 648:Talk:Penguin 645: 642:New Penguins 587: 585: 548: 480: 435: 384:Reptile nest 342: 259: 255: 238: 206: 196: 172: 161: 154: 113: 78: 43: 37: 3247:Plocepasser 3243:Philetairus 2723:Scrub-robin 2606:Night-Heron 2596:page) that 2414:T. melanops 2332:one of mine 2250:Black Crake 1644:Review list 1283:BWP Concise 1030:Neale Monks 968:Neale Monks 964:Common name 940:Neale Monks 797:. cheers, 438:84.9.35.112 388:mammal nest 364:Insect nest 36:This is an 3416:Blue Noddy 3239:Histurgops 3191:talk page. 2542:Nyctanassa 2518:Nyctanassa 2514:Nycticorax 2510:Nyctanassa 2506:Nyctanassa 2501:Nycticorax 2496:Nyctanassa 2190:status! -- 2058:coronoides 2000:Fredwerner 1721:Fredwerner 1528:has grown 1417:especially 857:einameisen 820:Family Guy 721:Sadalmelik 682:Sadalmelik 417:egg (food) 376:ant colony 162:coronoides 98:Archive 15 90:Archive 11 85:Archive 10 3302:, and 2) 3255:Ploceidae 3199:yourself. 3121:template? 2455:Jimfbleak 2131:Cas Liber 1563:jimfbleak 1477:Talk:Bird 1464:Talk:Bird 1399:Jimfbleak 1253:Yomangani 1233:Jimfbleak 1216:Jimfbleak 1193:Jimfbleak 746:Ptarmigan 526:Borisblue 499:Borisblue 491:goldfinch 421:Jimfbleak 380:Bird nest 372:wasp nest 324:Jimfbleak 219:—msikma ( 79:Archive 9 73:Archive 8 68:Archive 7 60:Archive 5 3039:contribs 3029:Casliber 3003:family ( 3001:cardinal 2993:cardinal 2859:Lissotis 2851:Ardeotis 2847:Lissotis 2825:Lissotis 2789:readable 2785:Rallidae 2764:contribs 2754:Casliber 2192:Abbott75 2139:contribs 2040:Birdman1 2010:Birdman1 1987:Birdman1 1907:Birdman1 1897:Birdman1 1859:Birdman1 1839:contribs 1831:Casliber 1795:contribs 1787:Casliber 1770:Pmeleski 1729:contribs 1717:unsigned 1674:Birdman1 1648:Pmeleski 1636:Birdman1 1623:Pmeleski 1614:Birdman1 1605:Pmeleski 1590:Birdman1 1248:recently 951:UtherSRG 879:Einemsen 853:einemsen 809:contribs 799:Casliber 702:contribs 692:Casliber 628:UtherSRG 468:Ling.Nut 281:Spamsara 245:Spamsara 213:and the 193:taxonomy 3467:Sheep81 3457:Quadell 3436:Agree. 3406:Quadell 3361:Laridae 3225:Quadell 3162:Quadell 3130:Quadell 3099:agree.) 3025:Amazona 2985:in the 2952:Birds: 2813:Bustard 2657:Quadell 2580:Quadell 2406:picture 2396:picture 2386:picture 2366:picture 2342:picture 2318:picture 2308:picture 2298:picture 2288:picture 2278:picture 2268:picture 2254:picture 2244:picture 2234:picture 2224:picture 2069:Shyamal 1488:be bold 1397:Agreed 1051:Shyamal 1012:Birding 936:WP:FISH 931:WP:BIRD 926:WP:BIRD 904:Shyamal 871:Shyamal 861:Shyamal 828:WP:BIAS 742:Lagopus 738:leucura 670:Quadell 448:Shyamal 396:Circeus 368:beehive 128:Sheep81 119:WP:DINO 39:archive 3304:Weaver 3272:Weaver 3177:MeegsC 2995:in the 2855:Neotis 2781:really 2718:Polbot 2651:FWIW, 2639:MeegsC 2610:MeegsC 2354:and a 2274:Brubru 2051:Corvus 1768:it.... 1530:hugely 1324:MeegsC 1311:Gambia 1265:Polbot 1168:(e.g. 1111:MeegsC 1047:WP:TOL 954:(talk) 851:Is it 715:Polbot 666:Polbot 631:(talk) 554:MeegsC 509:MeegsC 350:MeegsC 299:MeegsC 264:MeegsC 199:Kakapo 191:Kakapo 155:Corvus 3113:make. 2925:pages 2682:page. 2532:SP-KP 2486:SP-KP 1705:from 1507:SP-KP 1468:SP-KP 1408:NSOED 1315:kinds 1250:was. 1152:SP-KP 1107:valid 996:SP-KP 987:'Card 887:emsig 590:" to 392:Aerie 241:above 16:< 3442:talk 3396:talk 3369:talk 3330:talk 3290:talk 3223:. – 3181:Talk 3152:talk 3076:very 3058:talk 3033:talk 3013:talk 2910:talk 2853:and 2758:talk 2741:talk 2702:talk 2643:Talk 2625:and 2614:Talk 2436:talk 2330:and 2155:talk 2147:Bird 2135:talk 2123:bird 2112:talk 2104:bird 2086:Jbdy 2023:talk 1967:talk 1835:talk 1809:talk 1791:talk 1783:Bird 1753:talk 1745:bird 1741:bird 1725:talk 1703:bird 1693:talk 1684:bird 1538:Alai 1534:here 1496:talk 1484:beak 1447:talk 1406:The 1378:talk 1369:beak 1364:bold 1355:bird 1328:Talk 1273:talk 1130:and 1115:Talk 1091:and 1065:talk 980:last 921:Lion 803:talk 696:talk 612:talk 558:Talk 549:hope 539:talk 513:Talk 495:here 432:Eggs 374:and 354:Talk 345:Nest 339:Nest 303:Talk 268:Talk 225:talk 221:user 215:Kaka 177:Jude 143:talk 3007:). 2821:Yes 2807:as 2633:or 2498:in 2137:| 1837:| 1793:| 1390:MPF 1319:MPF 1300:MPF 1287:MPF 1203:MPF 1182:MPF 934:at 900:ant 522:FWS 415:or 409:egg 258:or 211:Kea 3422:.) 3249:, 3245:, 3241:, 3179:| 3041:) 2960:, 2956:, 2791::) 2766:) 2641:| 2612:| 2256:, 2133:| 2038:-- 1985:-- 1895:-- 1833:| 1789:| 1731:) 1727:• 1479:: 1326:| 1296:is 1172:, 1113:| 902:. 859:? 811:) 704:) 556:| 511:| 497:. 466:. 419:? 386:, 382:, 370:, 352:| 301:| 266:| 223:, 94:→ 64:← 3209:— 3036:· 3031:( 2975:( 2962:3 2958:2 2954:1 2944:I 2931:) 2761:· 2756:( 2525:) 2420:— 2416:. 2404:( 2398:) 2394:( 2388:) 2384:( 2378:) 2374:( 2368:) 2364:( 2358:) 2350:( 2340:( 2326:( 2320:) 2316:( 2310:) 2306:( 2300:) 2296:( 2290:) 2286:( 2280:) 2276:( 2270:) 2266:( 2260:) 2252:( 2246:) 2242:( 2236:) 2232:( 2226:) 2222:( 1735:. 1723:( 806:· 801:( 748:. 699:· 694:( 227:) 110:? 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 9 - Knowledge (XXG)

Index