Talk:Domestic duck/Archive 1

Comments
You know the crested duck is refering to the mallard derived breed not the species right?http://www.feathersite.com/Poultry/Ducks/Crest/BRKCrestedDucks.html

where'd my article on Appleyard ducks go why was it deleted without explanation it had the same amount of info as the buff duck page? The Great White Hunter 16:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Mike_Winters


 * It was deleted as a copyvio of the two articles cited in the references. Yomangani talk 16:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

strange pic
Why does a duck page have a pic of geese with roosters in the background? 81.153.58.189 11:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Those are Pekin ducks, not Domestic geese, they're both white, but geese have much longer necks and are shaped differently.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 17:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Page split?
I think it would make the page better if we separate domesticated duck into two one for domesticated mallard and one for domesticated muscovy. The reason being would be to make the articles more focused on pouring information about the two. You know how good the domesticated pig article looks? to me fantastic why not put this page at that standard. hello this talk section exists.

How old?
This article has nothing about where and when they were first domesticated, other than that they have been for "hundreds of years". Isn't it more likely to be thousands of years, as with chickens/geese/turkeys? --81.158.147.90 (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Indoor ducks
I have removed "as a pet" from the following wording:"They can be kept in a garden or backyard, and with special accessories, have also been known to be kept in the house as a pet."While cautiously worded, this still implies keeping ducks indoors as more practical than it really is. Ducks have minimal control of their droppings, and cannot be housetrained; diapering a duck obstructs much-needed preening in the diapered area, so feathers lose oil and become infused with duck waste, some of which will not wash away until the next moult.

I am currently keeping one duck in the house to prevent the spread of a staph infection to the rest of her flock. It's a lot of work, a terrible mess, and the duck hates it. Joey and Chandler notwithstanding, I doubt anyone keeps a duck indoors as a pet, at least not for long.

I would prefer this say "and with special accessories, have also been known to be kept temporarily in the house", but that constitutes original research. Here is a source that would fail Reliable sources, but states the problem emphatically enough. / edg ☺ ☭ 14:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Farming, third paragraph change
Please change "Ducks can be kept free range, in cages, or in batteries." to "Ducks can be kept free range, in barns, cages, or in batteries."

Most duck farms in the U.S. raise ducks in spacious barns. Duck574 (talk) 18:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC) ✅- Philippe 19:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Can't Edit
Can someone fix the right top info box. At the very bottom is captioned: "(Domesticated Muscovy duck)"...it needs to be corrected to "(Domesticated Muscovy Duck)" with a capital D.  Thank you. Wakeenahh (talk) 23:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Taxonomy
Some websites have stated that the scientific name of the domestic duck is either Anas adunca or Anas platyrhynchos adunca.

Names given to Domestic Breeds Anas adunca Linne, Systema Naturae, ed. 10, vol. 1, p. 128, 1758. Anas curvirosfra Pallas, Spicilegia Zoologica, pt. 6, p. 33, 1769. Anas cirrhata. Anas persica. Anas major. Anas grisea. Anas ncevia. Anas nigra

http://archive.org/stream/naturalhistoryof02phil/naturalhistoryof02phil_djvu.txt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aves_in_the_10th_edition_of_Systema_Naturae

The Domestic Muscovy should also actually be Cairina sylvestris moschata. This is because most other domestic animals have the domestic counterpart as the subspecies of the wild counterpart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.105.47 (talk) 09:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Domestic vs Domesticated
We are presently having a discussion at WikiProject Poultry Talk Page on a standard usage of domestic vs domesticated in poultry article names. If you would like to contribute to this discussion please visit the link. JTdale  Talk 07:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 18:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Can we add a nutrition section?
You know, compare say with chicken meat/eggs. 69.22.242.15 (talk) 21:49, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Taxobox
I propose to remove the data for the domesticated muscovy duck from the taxobox. Two (sub)species in one taxobox does not make any sence. It's Domestication is described in detail in the main Muscovy duck article but not in this one. ABesheva (talk) 23:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Domestic duck, not just Mallard
This article is about the domestic duck, not just the domestic Mallard but all ducks that are domesticated, including hybrids and the Muscovy duck. I believe that has always been its focus, but it is certainly the case now, so I'll put the title back to remain in keeping with the text. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)


 * If the article is to be about domestic ducks in general (Mallard breeds and Muscovy Ducks) then the scientific classification needs to be removed, as it only lists Mallards. There is a separate page for Domestic Muscovy Ducks, so why not make this one for Domestic Mallards? Jasonhgraham3 (talk) 02:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The domestic Muscovy is just a redirect. The classification thingy probably needs a statement of qualification of some sort. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Currently there is a page specifically for the domestic Muscovy Duck breed. Could a solution be to create a page dedicated to Domestic Mallards and use the current Domestic Duck article as an umbrella for both? I think this is appropriate seeing as they are different species. Jasonhgraham3 (talk) 04:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Once again, "Domestic Muscovy duck" is not a "page" but a redirect to a section of the "Muscovy duck" article. But even if there was a "page", WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS would still apply, it's not an argument to follow. There is a (very) large overlap between "Domestic duck" and "Anas platyrhynchos domesticus (Linn.)", so you'd just be creating a WP:CFORK, inherently undesirable and contrary to policy. Further, everybody basically expects the two to go together, so we're much better off having one article, and noting that the match isn't quite perfect. On your argument "seeing as they are different species", note that these are the wild species, for which we already have the two articles; the domestic duck involves two subspecies and hybrids of them (mulards), and we don't normally have subspecies articles. I've added the word "mainly" at the top of the article; I'd do the same in the subspeciesbox if there was an obvious way to do it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Well,, it was an article until you redirected it four days ago, and now is one again. The 'domestic' section of the Muscovy Duck article needs some serious attention. We also have mulard, by the way. This muddle needs to be sorted out (just as does the similar muddle at cattle), but I've no particular opinion on how that should be done. 's suggestion may be a good one, trying to shoehorn everything into one page probably not so good. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Gosh, I must admit I'd clean forgotten I'd redirected that: an alarming realisation. Don't really agree with "shoehorning", as we can agree that the archetypal domestic duck is a mallard, and at least 95% actually are mallards. The "hard cases make bad law": we shouldn't create weird structures for the odd few percent of hard cases. To our readers, "domestic duck" more or less equals "domestic mallard" (if they've ever heard of the species name, that is), so it's a needlessly strange thing to do. To put it another way, nobody is going to search for "domestic mallard"; and everybody is going to find having two (or three) articles, where they expect one, amazingly unhelpful. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree. I think the easiest way would be to have two separate scientific classification boxes, one for each domestic variant/subspecies, seeing as they split at the genus level. If that's something that can even be done? At the very least, both species should be included in the first sentence. That way the informed like us can be satisfied by the accuracy, while still making sense to the layperson.  Jasonhgraham3 (talk) 01:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Not taxonomically acurrate
If the article is to be about domestic ducks in general (Mallard breeds and Muscovy Ducks) then the scientific classification needs to be removed, as it only lists Mallards. There is a separate page for Domestic Muscovy Ducks, so why not make this one for Domestic Mallards? Jasonhgraham3 (talk) 02:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, it probably needs qualifying in some way, but it does need to be mentioned. Chiswick Chap (talk) 03:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Or we could add a second subspeciesbox, of course, I believe there is no reason why we shouldn't. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC)