Talk:Red-billed quelea

Removed line
I removed this line...One of the few natural enemies is the crocodile, which lurks in the drinking places of the birds, and may snatch several at an opportune moment. It seems impossible that a common species has few natural enemies, and unlikely that the croc hunts for small birds. Sabine's Sunbird talk 01:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions for GAN and eventual FAC
I would suggest looking at the structure of an existing FA bird article. Take Flame robin. Note in particular: I'll continue to copyedit and feel free to ask me anything. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  05:13, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Less is better when it comes to sections. Well, it's a balance thing, in this case there are too many. Description should be a single section, or maybe two (a main one and a subsection for calls) not 7 (some of which are single lines). Similar case for taxonomy, and for the relationship with humans sections (uses, pest and aviculture).
 * The lead should summarise the whole article. I can help with this if you like.
 * I would move the images around the article rather than having a single gallery mid-article.

Embarrassing etymology section
According to Wikipedia's own articles, the red-headed quelea's Swahili name is kwelea kichwa-chekundu, the cardinal quelea is kwelea kidari-chekundu and the red-billed quelea is kwelea domo-jekundu. Why then does this article engage in what looks like embarrassing folk etymology and leave the Swahili until the end? Abductive (reasoning) 06:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you clarify, Abductive... I think your point is that the article begins the section on etymology by saying "Linnaeus himself did not explain the name quelea. Modern ornithologists have suggested different explanations...", but ends saying that the Swahili name for the bird is "kwelea domo-jekundu", and that this shows that the obvious source of the species / genus name is its local name, and that the article should point this out at the start of the etymology? hamiltonstone (talk) 13:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Are we certain that the "kwelea" is not taken from the "quelea" though? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nothing is certain, but it looks bad. One learns to recognize folk etymologies. Also, the sourcing is pitiful; the source is a dictionary list, not a secondary analysis. Abductive  (reasoning) 16:47, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The primary source and unsourced WP:OR material has been removed. Please do not return it to the article. Abductive  (reasoning) 16:53, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you back up a moment for me, Abductive, and explain why you're so firm on the dictionary issue? The dictionary entry itself has cited sources, and I am not clear why this is so completely off-base, nor why it is being treated here as a "primary source"? I agree with you about bringing forward the local etymology; I am not clear about the rest of your argument. hamiltonstone (talk) 13:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If a dictionary gives etymologies then it is a fine source. But the article attributed all kinds of info to the source which was a bare-bones dictionary list. Abductive  (reasoning) 06:20, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Here is what Jobling has to say: "quelea Med. L. qualea quail. The relevance of this name to the Afrotropical queleas is unclear, but Jeffreys (1973) suggested a connection between the pestilential swarms of queleas that ravage the crops of modern Africa and the huge numbers of quail Coturnix that fell upon the camp of the Israelites, “as it were a day’s journey on this side, and as it were a day’s journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth” (Numbers XI, 31). Gotch (1987) believes it to be from an African native name (Quelea)." Jobling doesn't list a Gotch (1987) but there is: Gotch, A. F. 1981. Birds – their Latin names explained. Blandford Press. - Aa77zz (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


 * This is good, as we can attribute any attributions to people. Will chase these later today unless someone else beats me to it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Emberiza quelea is based on a type from Senegal. So it is very unlikely that a Kiswahili word would be the source of the epithet. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 09:03, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia does not need me. Some editors feel the need to extremely fiercely discredit my contributions. "Embarrassing", "it looks bad", "pitiful", "completely off-base", "the article attributed all kinds of info to the source which was a bare-bones dictionary list". Perhaps I'd better look for an other hobby. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 09:10, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Haters gonna hate. Disregard the useless adjectives, propose solutions, and then we'll leave it to future generations to judge who was acting "embarrassingly". FunkMonk (talk) 09:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I will put the Jeffreys info back in...just found fulltext of book so might find name of reference. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:22, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There still needs to be an explanation of the remarkable similarity of the Swahili word and the specific epithet, lest the article look like it was written by Eurocentric editors.  Abductive  (reasoning) 15:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We can't invent one if none exists. We need a source. And it is not impossible the Swahili word was derived from the English. Right now we are reflecting the sources in that two derivations have been proposed and we are listing them. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:13, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The vast majority of sources is written by Europeans, and since the 1930s by what we call westerners. That cannot be helped. Few other plant or animal articles on Wikipedia even mention local vernaculars.
 * Anyway, Kiswahili for bird is "ndege", weaver bird is "ndege mweusi", sparrow is "shoro", red is "jekundu", and beak is "mdomo". Automated translation of the word "kwelea" however is a problem. "-elea" seems to mean to float, but reversal does not lead to the original. "Kwelea" translates to stop, but the reversal does not produce "kwelea". This is from Google Translate. There is a publication Birds of Tanzania: A provisional list of bird names in Kiswahili by Charles O.F. Mlinga, that says that for the 1036 bird species in Tanzania, only 150 have a Swahili name, and he proposes names for the rest. I can't myself access that publication, but I do not have the impression from the summary that it will provide etymologies. As written higher up, Emberiza quelea is based on a type from Senegal (in West-Africa), which makes it unlikely that a Kiswahili word (spoken in East-Africa), would be the source of the epithet. As Kiswahili is a trade language, by definition simple in structure and very rich in loanwords, it seems likely the vernacular is a direct translation from the English. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 08:06, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Not even a penny?
In the "interaction with humans" section, it says

An estimated five to ten million queleas are trapped near N'Djamena each year, representing a market value of approximately US$37,500–75,000.

I get that the cost of living varies a lot from place to place, but does it really vary that much? These birds are not worth even a penny a piece in US currency? If I showed up in Chad with $100 worth of the local currency I could walk home with 12,000 of these things? — Soap — 04:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)