Jump to content

Talk:List of birds by common name

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Images

[edit]

Could someone help me with inserting images to the list, I've not got that much time to do it myself at the moment, and I would love it if someone would offer. Also, for anyone that reads this, feel free to sign my guestbook! :) Ross Rhodes (T C) Sign! 22:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Purpose & source?

[edit]

I hope this loco a silly question, but what is the purpose of this list, and what is it based on? --Tony Wills (talk) 06:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering of list not helpful

[edit]

The title implies the birds are listed in order of common name: in fact they aren't. I actually did have a need to find all birds beginning with D, and it would be helpful to have a parallel list in alphabetical order? This list is in such random order it's hard to find anything. ~~Martin Burroughs~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.19.68 (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List makes no sense

[edit]

I don’t understand this list at all. It seems to claim to include 9,721 species but in fact it only features about 2,000. An example of its inadequacy is that it includes the grey wagtail but ignores 11 other species in the same genus (Motacilla)— white wagtail, Japanese wagtail, white-browed wagtail, Mekong wagtail, African pied wagtail, citrine wagtail, western yellow wagtail, eastern yellow wagtail, Cape wagtail, Madagascar wagtail and mountain wagtail. User:Andrewdavidhaynes —Preceding undated comment added 21:32, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested preface

[edit]

This list makes sense to me, a birdwatcher, as the bird names in this list are arranged first by family and in the same order as almost all bird guides. But this list could do with a preface explaining that rationale for order as well as something on the origin of and administration of official common names.

The arrangement of birds by family is agreed upon based on attributes that I believe has to do with the fossil record, on whether the young are precocial or altricial, and other developmental characteristics. All named plants and animals have committees that officiate the scientific naming / classification of every species; only some animals (such as birds and butterflies) have official common names.

While I could eventually write that preface, I've too many projects as is and encourage someone else to take it on.

GeeBee60 (talk) 15:53, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of English species names

[edit]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Capitalization of English species names that's relevant to this list. Huon (talk) 16:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted PROD

[edit]

I tried to PROD this article, having overlooked the 2013 attempt to delete it. If anything, it's a worse article now than then. How can the issue be revisited? Here's my reasoning for deletion: (1) The article has no content that isn't better presented in List of birds and as detailed below has much incorrect content. (2) The article has no source. The purported source, Bird: the definitive visual guide, is an overview with representatives of each family, not an all-species book. Even if it were an all-species book, it's 10 years old. (3) The sequence of families and the sequence of species within each family don't follow any of the four major worldwide taxonomies (IOC, Clements, HBW/Birdlife, and Howard and Moore). (4) The list is far from complete, with only 5541 species listed - not the 9722 hinted at in the introduction and only a little more than half of the currently recognized species. Even some family sections which appear to be complete are not; for instance only 348 of the world's 359 hummingbird species (by IOC count) are listed. (5) The sections appear to be an attempt at listing species by family but many entries are wrong. For example: (a) "Orioles" contains both Old and New World species, which are in different families, (b) "Babblers and relatives" contains species from three families, none of them closely related, (c) "Bunting [sic] and American sparrows" contains species from four families, and (d) Antpittas and Anthrushes are separate families. (6) The list contains entries which are not recognized by any of the four major taxonomies, for instance yellow-billed kite. (7) "Recently extinct" is not defined and there is no distinction between living and extinct species in the list. (8) The title is misleading; it's a list OF common names, not a list BY common name. (9) And on a minor note, spellings are not consistent; grey and gray are both used as are colored and coloured. Craigthebirder (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Craigthebirder: The WP:AFD process is probably the next step. On the Twinkle menu it's "XFD", then that takes you through the process and then you can alert anyone else on their talk page. Be sure to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of birds by common name first though. I've never used Twinkle for a second nomination for deletion, so I don't know if it can handle that. Based on the feedback in the first discussion, is there another way the article could be formed so that it could be useful to people trying to find a species name? Maybe it's not necessary that it make taxonomic sense, but that hardly seems encyclopedic. I'm just thinking. SchreiberBike | ⌨  02:29, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicates in list

[edit]

The following bird names are in the list twice.

Three times

 SchreiberBike | ⌨  08:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked the species above which I have removed from the list with an asterisk (*). I'll remove more later as I have time. SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All the species above have been removed. SchreiberBike | ⌨  03:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of "common name" and time period

[edit]

If this list is to have some value, I think it should be limited to species which have a common name. Genera have been added recently that should be in italics. I can't find any common name for the species in those genera.

Also, up until yesterday the list has said it is for species that are "extant and recently extinct". Should we be including species that are long extinct,or even those which may not be defined as birds? Thanks, SchreiberBike | ⌨  04:06, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The list is now 231,565 bytes. WP:TOOLONG says articles "> 100 kB Almost certainly should be divided", but makes allowances for lists, but still says "a list or table should be kept as short as is feasible for its purpose and scope." I find the list difficult to edit because it is too long.
I'd love some discussion about what should be included. I don't think species without common names should be included. I think a better cutoff for time period should be "recently extinct". I'm open to other opinions though. Thank you, SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:04, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Order

[edit]

What's the best order for a list of birds by common name? I can think of several reasonable alternatives, but most are too complex for me to do. It's a mess now, using a mix of systems. I've boldly put it in simple alphabetical order for now.

Also, the list is incomplete, having 7,991 names, or missing about 2,000. Is there a way to generate a list of bird species in Wikipedia?

Finally, the list as I have changed it is now based on Wikipedia and the references are just decorative. Any suggestion on better references. SchreiberBike | ⌨  04:36, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Major Mitchell's cockatoo

[edit]

Shouldn't it say pink cockatoo? Regent honeyeater (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Regent honeyeater: It looks like the name has changed. I can make the change, or you can. Welcome to Wikipedia and be bold! SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extinct birds that don't have the † symbol

[edit]

I have noticed a number of extinct birds that are missing a †; I have fixed four already, but this is an ongoing problem. Regent honeyeater (talk) 08:36, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Regent honeyeater: If you are in the mood for a project, go ahead and mark them all. Be bold! SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:55, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Species that have been split

[edit]

I have noticed that several species such as the green bee-eater have been split. This list should be changed to reflect that. Regent honeyeater (talk) 23:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the easiest way to do that is the way the list was generated last time. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 72#Complete list of bird species articles in Wikipedia which describes the method I used. Unless there's a list of changes made recently by IOC, that's probably the easiest approach. @Jts1882: Could you either rerun the list you now have at User:Jts1882/sandbox/IOC102 or show me how you got that list? If it's from here, which list should be used? Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd forgotten I'd made that list. I've update it to IOC 14.1 and moved the page to a more generic name: User:Jts1882/sandbox/IOC Bird List (common names). This time I used the master list, but both it and the Life List files have a column with common names that can be used. I've also added instructions for how to generate the list at the top of the page. Briefly, it is copy the common names column, sort to remove blank lines, generate wikitaxt using the CONCAT function in column B). I'm happy for people to edit the page in my user space for future updates, but perhaps we should make a project subpage.  —  Jts1882 | talk  08:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could probably make a template to generate the wikitext. Using Lua it would be easy to make some checks, like changing capitalisation, possibly checking things like grey/gray. Not sure how much this would facilitate updating the list.  —  Jts1882 | talk  08:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a bunch. I don't think there's a need for a template. It's not to hard to make manually and too often I've found that the source will change something, then the template will no longer work. A pleasure working with you! SchreiberBike | ⌨  11:26, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After a long delay, I've made a major update to the list based on the latest list from the IOC, 14.2. I found "IOC_Names_File_Plus-14.2_full-ssp.xlsx" to be the clearest. I did create a script using AWB so this can be done more quickly in the future.
As Wikipedia does not use IOC names exactly, I had to make changes. Where the names were close, like where Wikipedia uses diacritics or British spellings, but IOC does not, I used Wikipedia's titles. Where the names were substantially different I piped the links. Those are editorial choices I made and am willing to discuss.
Let me know if you see any problems, there probably are some. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:06, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Species from IOC 14.2 which do not have articles

[edit]

Species in IOC 14.2 which are not in Wikipedia:

There are 53 above. I now see that some of them have become blue links since I started working on the list. Some of them show as green links for me as they are redirects; those are considered full species by IOC and should become articles. If it looks like any above are wrong, let me know and I'll figure out what went wrong. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]