Talk:Stock dove

How could I feet
How 2A02:A46F:4104:1:702A:56E5:4183:1184 (talk) 20:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Problems with this article.
Description section issues:

A majority of the description section for this species isn't even about the species in question... "The genus Columba is in the pigeon family, and has the widest distribution. Its members are typically pale grey or brown, often with white head or neck markings or iridescent green or purple patches on the neck and breast. The neck feathers may be stiffened and aligned to form grooves, but these are absent in this species." Is a majority of this info really relevant to this Wikipedia page? I've never seen an article go into so much detail about the genus, when it's supposed to be a species page.

"The common wood pigeon may be readily distinguished by its large size, as well as the white on its neck (in adults) and wings. The rock dove and stock dove are more alike in size and plumage, but wild specimens of the former have a white rump and two well-marked dark bars on the wing, while the rump of the stock dove is grey and its wing bars incomplete. The feral pigeon (the same species as the rock dove) is highly variable, and indistinctly marked grey specimens with the white rump missing can sometimes resemble the stock dove quite closely." Again, a majority of this paragraph is dedicated to talking about other subjects that have Wikipedia articles of their own. I feel as though a paragraph describing the stock dove itself would be far more beneficial than a paragraph dedicated to describing various other pigeon species. You might see another species mentioned in an articles description if there is genuine confusion between them, (think of species within the same genus that look almost exactly the same with very minor differences.) Most readers however would not confuse a feral pigeon with a wood pigeon or stock dove. I can see the similarities between a wood pigeon and a stock dove but that's it. I personally wouldn't mention the similarity in the article unless there are reputable citation sources claiming the two species are often confused.

The most concerning issue of all is that the stock dove doesn't even have a proper description of its species within its own Wikipedia articles description section. Nobody reading this article can learn about it's physiology, but can instead learn about other distinct species or the genus in general.

Ecology section issues:

There is a lack of citations for a majority of the ecology section, so references need to be found to support the information written. The section also needs rewording to fit the standard of a Wikipedia article. "stock doves stop over at places with an abundance of acorns" or "The nest is usually in a hole in an old tree" and various other sentences are worded poorly to prevent clear and concise reading and would benefit from rewording / rephrasing. JarroNevsbaru (talk) 08:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)