Talk:Buzzard

Exhaustive list of Buteo species? What for?
According to what's written in the Old World and New World sections, it's inconsistent to include New World-only Buteos in the list. The Red-Tailed Hawk is not a buzzard, by either the New World or the Old World conventions. Loads of other examples. Somebody please clean it up: I would do it but I don't presume to know what's most appropriate on the list - all I know is that the inconsistency is glaring. 68.121.151.166 02:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Me either because i don't even like cleaning up my room

Please explain in detail why the Red-tailed hawk doesn't fit the Old World description. In the UK all members of the genus Buteo are buzzards by definition. Buzzards are small to medium sized diurnal birds of prey, with long broad wings and medium length tails and legs. They are active predators and very seldom feed on carrion. All members of the genus Buteo are buzzards, including the Red-tail. Though we Americans commonly refer to them as hawks, strictly speaking they are not. True hawks have short rounded wings, long legs and talons, and long tails, and belong to the genus Accipiter, such as A. gentilis (Goshawk) and A. cooperii (Cooper's hawk). The problem is Americans with little knowledge of birds persist in confusing the term buzzard with New World vultures, such as the Black vulture and the Turkey vulture. Use of the word buzzrd should be discouraged unless used accurately, specifically as a common term for the members of genus Buteo. ENScroggs (talk) 19:22, 12 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The simplest explanation is that neither buzzard nor hawk is a universal term. Buzzard has several meanings varying in scientific precision. Listing a species AS a buzzard is a different claim than to say some people may call it that. The Red-tailed hawk is not a European bird. Regardless of whether Europeans call other buteos buzzards, it's somewhat irrelevant as that name is never applied (correctly) to Red-tailed Hawks. That's like saying the Common Buzzard is correctly called a Common Hawk. It's misconstruing the general with the specific. A common Buzzard is correctly a buzzard, as a Red-tailed Hawk is correctly a hawk, in a comparison of European versus New World naming. If it's endemic to only one area, then it not correct to apply a colloquial name from another area to it. The RTH is the accepted ornithological name for the species, not a colloquial name, just the same with the Common Buzzard. The Red-tailed Hawk does not exist in a place where the common colloquial name for it is buzzard. Belonging to a general family that one area calls buzzards does not apply. That would be like arguing all vultures around the world are actually buzzards because some areas of the US call vultures buzzards colloquially. If you're not referring to capital B Buzzard, or capital H hawk, then you ARE using a colloquial (if commonly accepted in your area) word. And it's not valid to assume it applies universally just because you think it should. 204.65.34.132 (talk) 20:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree, what for? My new North American birds field guide does not list anywhere the term "buzzard." The turkey vulture (Cathartes Aura, not a Buteo species)is what I mean when I say buzzard (searches for and circles around carrion, has a red head, is subjectively "ugly"). Aren't there any Ornithologists here to speak up? I think "Buzzard" is a colloquial term for a bird that feast on road kill, and other dead things, but do not feel qualified to rewrite this whole entry. Purplerhinoceros (talk) 05:20, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

New World/Old World
I am not particularly knowledgeable in this field, but using that terminology is somewhat confusing and antiquated (in my opinion). Wouldn't Afro-Eurasia/The Americas be clearer? 131.231.233.52 (talk) 22:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No. Unless you don't speak English as a first language, and for some reason you find these terms beyond your limited comprehension, your suggestion would be more confusing, not less so. Mike Hayes (talk) 20:19, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

New and Old Worlds???
The New and Old World definitions are really confusing and vague. One shouldn't have to look up what they mean to find out about a bird. Secondly, do non-English speaking people use the word 'Buzzard'? If not, any mentions of 'Old World' and 'Europe' could be replaced with 'UK and Ireland'. Likewise, 'New World' presumably means the US and Canada here. JeffersonFootranch (talk) 20:56, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh dear, such a narrow US view of the world. South Africa, Kenya, Jamaica, Uganda, Nigeria, St Lucia, Guyana, Ghana, Australia, Dominica, Namibia... the list goes on, and that's not counting India with its millions of fluent English speakers; and you might find that there are one or two people who can speak English very well in, for example, The Netherlands and Scandinavia.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:51, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Vultures are not buzzards, regardless of how many people learned otherwise from watching factually inaccurate western movies during their childhood. 08:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.133.198.203 (talk)

Vultures may not be buzzards, but there are plenty of places in the US where "buzzard" never means anything else. I see no reason not to include a note on the "buzzard" page to that effect, even if it's only to send people to the right place. The Ridger (talk) 14:20, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * If you're an English-speaking person, you know what these terms (New and Old Worlds) mean without thinking about it. If you are not, that is one of the challenges of learning a second language. I would suggest improving your own English skills rather than expecting anglophones to change their speech for your personal ease of comprehension. Mike Hayes (talk) 20:24, 29 July 2014 (UTC)


 * If a reader is confused, it's a problem with the text, not the reader. None of us is born knowing what any word means! This page needs a clearer definition of the word "buzzard". Where is the etymology located? Why do North Americans associate this word with vultures? Kortoso (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

This entire page could be changed to just the north american disambiguation...
Why not just have the word buzzard redirect to buteo (since buteo is the latin word for buzzard) and have this page be titled north american disambiguation. New world/old world is confusing to many. In my north american bird book under the buteo chapter there is a single sentence "called 'buzzards' in many parts of the world except Norther America, there are 68 species... " which I think sums it up nicely. Buzzard is first and foremost the buteo genus by strict definition. The north american usage of the word should be an entirely separate page: Buzzard (North American usage).

Or, if redirecting it to buteo is disagreeable. This page should be purely about the latin origin of the word, reference to buteo and other species with the word buzzard in their common name. With a subsection titled North American usage. Under these headings new world and old world may be used, but it really doesn't work as the section headings.


 * The first one is probably too Euro-centric. I think most Americans looking up "buzzard" are probably looking for what are really vultures or other animals. I think this is a good disambiguation page... Smarkflea (talk)

This article is unnecessary
I can't for the life of me understand why this article exists. All Buteo species are buzzards. There is already a list of Buteo species under Buteo. Any reference to birds other than buzzards can be bulleted on the Buzzard (disambig) page. The present article should become a simple redirect to Buteo.Darorcilmir (talk) 11:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

"The Buzzards disambiguation" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Buzzards disambiguation. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 (talk) 06:08, 2 January 2020 (UTC)