Talk:List of birds of South Asia

Names
The list so far includes names and scientific names as used by the Oriental Bird Club, which in turn bases its list on the work of Inskipp and Duckworth. While this nomenclature may have widespread following in UK, it has problems for birdwatchers and ornithologists in India.

One problem is that it does not address sub-species names - this is not a problem if there are disjunct populations since we can usually reassign it based on geography. However in the case of overlapping populations, it has led to a loss of information on the sub-species due to observers who consider it unimportant - as an example, consider the Grey-headed Starling (as it has been known in Inda, here termed the Chestnut-tailed Starling) Sturnus malabaricus, it has a subspecies resident in the Western Ghats that is 'White-headed' which is Sturnus malabaricus blythii. In winter, both this and the migrant race Sturnus malabaricus malabaricus may be seen and most observers see no difference thanks to such standardized lists.

Another problem is that the hyphenation and concatenation rules are not consistent enough. For instance 'Leaf Warbler' should perhaps be 'Leaf-warbler'. Why should Laughingthrush be one word ? Yet another problem is the dropping of generic names - Openbill Stork has now become Asian Openbill, while Golden-backed Woodpeckers became Flameback. This practise may be ok for well-known species such as Gadwall, Garganey, Blackbird and Fieldfare.

And there are also some scientific name problems, a mapping between this list and ITIS database maintained by USDA would be useful.

Yes indeed, there is considerable dispute on the topic and will always continue - but a practical standard would help all concerned. Perhaps we could attempt to find the common ground on this article.

Shyamal 04:29, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * As the author of most of the regional lists, I think what you are suggesting is easier said than done, although you make some valid points. You have to start from what is available, since I'm not prepared to type in massive lists from scratch. All that you can do then is make sure that links to existing articles work, either by redirects or fixes. What is standard? ITIS uses American forms, and it would be bizarre to have eg Parasitic Jaeger or Black-bellied Plover in the List of British birds. jimfbleak


 * subspecies can be added by an extra indentation, see White Wagtail in the British list. Jim


 * I agree, i am hoping that WE can actually work towards compromise 'standard' :). As you have pointed out in the British list example, local interests do matter. And yes, adapting existing lists is the way ahead. Most of the standards are 'de facto' and are typically sold or enforced by identification guides. As long as there is a good enough mapping between the entities across guides, names should not gall us much. cheers, Shyamal 07:35, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)