Talk:Raphinae

Classifications of the dodo
Many classification of the dodo have been found, including many groups named before Raphinae. I am wondering if this page requires renaming, especially in light of new research (Parish, 2013) who found that the dodo and solitaire are:


 * Order Columbiformes
 * Suborder Columbae
 * Family Columbiformes
 * Subfamily Gourinae
 * Tribe Raphini

In his book "The Dodologist's Miscellany" (site here), Parish lists all the previous classifications of the dodo. The archive url for the classification section is here. The names are as follows:

Species:
 * Struthio cucullatus Linnaeus, 1758
 * Raphus cucullatus (L.) Brisson, 1760
 * Didus ineptus Linnaeus, 1766
 * Cygnus cucullatus (L.) Bomare, 1768
 * Didvs ineptus (L.) Scopoli, 1777 [sic]
 * Didus solitarius Gmelin, 1788
 * Didus nazarensis Gmelin, 1788
 * Didus apteryx Groningano, 1822
 * Didus broeckei Schlegel, 1854
 * Didus herberti Schlegel, 1854
 * Didus borbonicus Schlegel, 1854
 * Raphus borbonicus (S.) Gilliard, 1958

Suprageneric clades:
 * Family Inepti Illiger, 1811
 * Family Didiadae Swainson, 1836
 * Family Dididae Swainson, 1837
 * Subfamily Didinae Gray, 1840
 * Suborder Didi Bonaparte, 1857
 * Family Raphidae Oudemans, 1917
 * Subfamily Raphinae Hackisaka, 1953
 * Tribe Raphini Verheyen, 1957
 * Tribe Pezophabini Verheyen, 1957

The article is also outdated, the first mention of the dodo as a columbine was Hoeven, in 1830. IJReid (talk) 00:49, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, what it really comes down to is whether anyone else has accepted his classification scheme? It could certainly be mentioned, but we shouldn't change the scope of an article based on a single authors opinion, if other researchers don't agree. I'd take a look at this review: http://darrennaish.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/naish-2014-review-of-parish-dodo-and-solitaire-book-in-jvp.pdf As Naish notes, it is an interesting hypothesis, but should be submitted as a standalone paper for peer review. FunkMonk (talk) 01:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Heh, along with several Commons images, he also used this image on the right in a version I heavily retouched for Wikipedia: https://archive.org/stream/parishdodomisc4a#page/n5/mode/2up FunkMonk (talk) 02:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Funnily, I notified Julian Hume about the painting in Denmark on the right here two years ago, and he hadn't heard of it. I noticed the white Dodo by chance when I visited the museum. He said he would make a note of it, so I wonder whether Parish got it from him? It's the exact link I sent Hume, and there's no mention of the Dodo on the picture in the museum website, and it was apparently never figured in Dodo literature before. Or maybe he just found the file I uploaded to Commons! FunkMonk (talk) 01:25, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Now I have come across another possible problem with the article, this website, which is quite modern, uses Raphinae in a wide sense to encompass all non-columbines or non-peristerines. The website also lists Phabini, Raphini, Treronini, Turturini, and Ptilinopini as tribes in the family, which would completely change the scope of the article. IJReid (talk) 23:30, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, again, all that matters is what classification is most widely accepted, not the fact that it has been proposed. It is all about consensus. Websites aren't peer reviewed science either. FunkMonk (talk) 23:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Boyd's website follow Pereira et al. 2007 and Shaphiro et al. 2002. Burmeister (talk) 18:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * He bases his conclusions on it, but those genetic studies did not propose any new taxon names. Furthermore, Microgoura was not included in the genetic studies, so his basis for placing it in the same clade is only based on morphology. FunkMonk (talk) 22:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)


 * But yeah, once/if his idea is accepted by other sources, there should be little problem in just moving the article to Raphini (and redirecting Raphinae to Gourinae). The clade will still contain the same two taxa, Linnean ranks are arbitrary anyway. It is pretty much just a name change. FunkMonk (talk) 11:40, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Pre-GAN comments

 * You list several invalid species in the taxonomy section, you should make clear that they are not accepted today. FunkMonk (talk) 18:08, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "The didines are often separated as a distinct family Raphidae" Why use the invalid name here?
 * "In 1996, Beck named Raphinae, in this case used for a subfamily of insects." Yu don't make it clear why the family was later renamed. The name was already used for the dodo birds.
 * I removed the info on the insect subfamily. It has no real meaning in this article, and if anywhere, it should be added to the insect family page. IJReid (talk) 20:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, will add more comments soon. You could put the insect stuff in a note, maybe? FunkMonk (talk) 20:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * One question, where will the note go? IJReid (talk) 22:20, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps after the bolded: " and the dodo and solitaire are now placed in their own subfamily, Raphinae, in the family Columbidae." FunkMonk (talk) 22:40, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Four paragraphs is perhaps a bit much for the lead of an article this size. FunkMonk (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Removed the unneeded paragraph on divergence, the extinction and classification are more important for this article. IJReid (talk) 00:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * "Many of the skeletal features that distinguish the dodo and the Rodrigues solitaire, its closest relative," Most of the description section is written with the dodo as focus.
 * Furthermore, the description doesn't really describe the physical features of each bird, but goes into specific details about features that are important for taxonomy. There should be a general description of each bird.
 * There should be a behaviour section as well.
 * The quote under extinction seems a bit out of place since none other are used, perhaps the details aren't that important, maybe better as a short summary? FunkMonk (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the last paragraph under Extinction of the dodo should be removed, so the two sections are more balanced in size?

Classification change
Given that Raphinae is now considered to contain many extant groupings, should this page be moved to Didines in order to preserve the page while acknowledging the taxonomy update?Geekgecko (talk) 22:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Something needs to change, given the lead section currently directly contradicts the phylogeny section. We probably need someone with access to journals to determine if Raphinae is the valid name for what Soares et al. 2016 calls the "Indo-Pacific clade" or a branch within that clade, and if Didines is the valid name for the clade containing only Raphus cucullatus and Pezophaps solitaria. Esoteric bearcat (talk) 02:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
 * But what are we talking about here, the proposals by Parish? I'm not sure they have been accepted by anyone else. FunkMonk (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)