User talk:Sabine's Sunbird/archive 6


 * Archive No 1: October 2004- March 2006


 * Archive No 2: March 2006- Feb 2007


 * Archive No 3 Feb 2007- Jan 2008


 * Archive No 4 Jan 2008- Jan 2009


 * Archives No 5 Jan 2009- Feb 2010

Sparrows, yet again
Can you take a look at Saxaul Sparrow now that you have the HBW handy? This is the one where there will be a substantial difference between it and my sources. Also: I know you don't care, but the point of the reference style used in the sparrow articles is that the harvnb template is used to refer to a particular page number in a work, hence the HBW cited with no page numbers or the page numbers Summers-Smith's entire contribution should not use the harvnb template, but that citing one page should. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 22:55, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Not dead just had a 18 month wikibreak
Hola there. It´s been a year or so since I last talked to you, how´s the thesis going? how´s life at vic? I am back there also now although, strictly speaking, right now i am travelling in south america - but i will be back for tri 2 of 2010. I see you have gotten another few articles to FA since I last checked (at least i think), nice work. When i return to NZ I will have approximately 3 months to basically twiddle my thumbs before I return to uni and during this time I would like to push several NZ bird articles towards FA (you´ll see which when i begin my work). I have noticed that some of the FA´s you helped to create are very succinct, I really admire this quality in wikipedia articles and I hope to emulate it when I am making my own efforts to bag a few for myself. so my question is just...Can i consult you for ¨wikipedia bird article getting from B class to FA class¨ advice when I return in april??

Cheers, Kotare (talk) 05:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

P.S. Have you been along to gecko meetings in recent years? the crowd has changed a bit but it is still going strong last time i checked.


 * Hey man, thanks for your reply, sorry if mine has been a little delayed, I've just been settling back into normal life here after rerutning from Ecuador on april the 11th but I am now active on wikipedia again - it's great to be back :D. Well, I want to do as much of it as I can myself.. for the challenge and also it's part of this little plan i have for my wikipedia contributions - plus i'm sure you're pretty busy yourself but the goal is to get all 3 Callaeidae species articles to FA. but then again of course all wikipedia articles are a collaboration to some degree. Huia is the natural first candidate for me because it is already by far the most well developed of the trio. Then I'd probably rip into Kokako, because it is the next most well known bird and of significance in terms of use as a "flagship species" for campaigns in the preservation of central north island podocarp forest in the 70's and 80's and because it is on the back of our $50 note - and finally I'd hit up saddlback.

I already photocopied the HANZAB entry for Huia several years ago and will grab it on monday in preperation to start work. ''any suggestions? thoughts? should we write a "to-do" list for the article to get it to FA? can't be too far off now..'' one issue that exists is that it's a bit "bottom heavy" with the "in culture" sections. the basic biology stuff needs fleshing out so that the article is more well proportioned. Kotare (talk) 09:41, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. congrats on "Bird" getting to main page and all, I saw that the other day, looked really good. millons of people must use the english wikipedia each day, so talk about good exposure for, much of what was, your work! Cheers, Kotare (talk) 09:44, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Your comment
Thanks for your comment at my talk. I've answered there. Best, --Tryptofish (talk) 17:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Maps
Hope you can add map for Saxaul Sparrow soon—this, and not House Sparrow for some time, will be my next GA. As for accuracy, one must remember most distribution maps are highly approximate. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 21:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep the discussion on my page now. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 00:57, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Bird
Hello Sabine, it's been a while since I had the pleasure of visiting your talk page. Thank you for adding some alt text to the bird article, although I guess you realise there is quite a few more to do yet. I'm happy with the removal of the prehistoric bird orders classification. What do you think of the artciles hatnotes? I kinda feel three hatnotes it a bit cluttering. Would do you say? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Have created disambig page for Birdlife, required really, as Bird Life topic exists. Excellent effort with the alt and cleanup. Well done. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 03:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit to last entry
ah, didnt realize the placement was no good, will tag talk pages, thanks fro the help =) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dropbuiltdoes (talk • contribs) 06:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Confused / Wikiprojects
Isn't the purpose of a wikiproject tag, like, to tag articles that could be relevant to it? I have been tagging articles that could hold relefvance to piracy with, is this not helpful?

Oops
Hmm, maybe i acted too fast. I saw this project, then checked some possibly related articles and they weren't tagged. I thought it might help out the wiki to tag them all, so what is a wikiproject anyhow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dropbuiltdoes (talk • contribs) 06:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Ratings and importance
wasn't sure how this is determined, i simply copied the tag down, figured the others in the project who knew how could determine importance and quality. I'll try editing them to unknown or something rather than top / A, thanks!

HBW
Do you think it would be at all possible for you to send me photocopies of at least small portions of the HBW? I thought I'd be able to see a copy at a library here, but they're so low on money they've just stopped buying them. Thanks, &mdash;innotata 20:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure. I can take the book into work and scan pages onto PDFs. But I'm not back in work until Wednesday (probably Tuesday for the rest of the world). Sabine's Sunbird  talk  20:49, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not impatient. I don't need plates; it's the Passer entries I would like most; and I would like the family entry, but scan how much you feel like. &mdash;innotata 18:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll send you my e-mail. Thanks again. &mdash;innotata 18:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That is around 50 pages! I'll see what I can do. Sabine's Sunbird   talk  21:21, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I can list the pages I need most. &mdash;innotata 21:26, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Here are the pages I need most:


 * The ones I won't be able to make much of an article without: Italian Sparrow, Socotra Sparrow, Arabian Golden Sparrow
 * Next priority: Dead Sea Sparrow, Desert Sparrow, Kordofan Sparrow, Parrot-billed Sparrow, Shelley's Sparrow, Saxaul Sparrow, Swainson's Sparrow, Cape Verde Sparrow, Kenya Sparrow
 * Next: Southern Rufous Sparrow, Plain-backed Sparrow, Sind Sparrow, Somali Sparrow, Southern Grey-headed Sparrow, Spanish Sparrow, Sudan Golden Sparrow

Here are those I scarcely need at all:
 * Chestnut Sparrow, Eurasian Tree Sparrow, Grey-headed Sparrow, House Sparrow, Russet Sparrow. &mdash;innotata 21:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Great Tit
I don't know how much use this will be

Nominate major. Length 14, wing span 22.5-25.5, weight 16-22 m, 14-20 f, wing length 73-81 m 69-79 f

Wing lengths only, m first. major 68.5-78, 67-73; kapustini “as major”; newtoni 71-79, 69-80; corsus 69-78, 66.5-75; mallorcae 69.5-76, 67-74; ecki 70-78, 67-75; excelsus 74-84, 72-77; aphrodite 70-78,67-77; niethammeri 68-75, 67-71; terraesanctae 69-76, 67-72; blanfordi 73-81, 68-74 variations slight and clinal with intergrades where meet aphrodite  niethammeri and terraesanctae described as small compared to nominate,

 Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Great Tit GA review
I've just been combing through recent reviews. The article Great Tit looks good, and well done getting it passed at GA, but I have aquery not raised during the review. There are no references at all for the subspecies, which seems to me quite an oversight. Is there something available to remedy that? Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 23:00, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Eggs etc
Note that if necessary the Harrap ref can be used for the ssp

Eggs (all Harrap) clutch 5 - 12, second clutch is 1.5 to 2.5 eggs smaller than first. Size is 18 x 13.6 mm (0.71 x 0.51 in). This is for newtoni, but I should think it would be similar for other ssp.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * this gives 17.44 x 13.31 in Croatia, I assume for P. m. major . Since major is slightly smaller than newtoni, this makes sense. Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * more than you wanted to know?  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:06, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Turkestan Tit (all from Harrap ref0 15 cm (6 in) long, 20-25% longer tailed than Great Tit. Wings (m first) nom 63-72.5, 62-71.5; ferghanensis 66-79.5, 65-72; turkestanicus 66-79.5, 65-72
 * turkestan eggs 17.8 x 13.0 mm (0.70 x 0.51 in)  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  12:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Fauna of Australia...
might be heading to FAR soon - I figured you'd be familiar with some of the overview stuff in the Fauna_of_Australia section. Much of it is referenced by Egerton (a tertiary source?) which would be better sourced by Christidis and Boles or something else. I meant to re-borrow C&B today but work turned into a train-wreck and I lacked the time to get away to the library. Feel free to act upon any factual material you feel should be added or subtracted here - I am not sure about some of the factoids mentioned either. Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Cordyline australis
Re User:Kahuroa/Sandbox. I think I have fixed the issues you pointed out. I have given it a bit of a copy edit, and might step back from it for a few days for some perspective. If you'd like to give a more in-depth review, that would be great. I'm really pleased with your suggestions so far. What's missing - maybe something on its use in NZ culture - stamps, poems paintings, kitsch etc. Not my cup of tea at all, but I have material. Is there enough on the Māori uses of the plant? But the article's getting a tad long already. (It might be better to write a decent article on Māori traditional food crops, the Māori culture articles on Wikipedia are crap mostly). I realise the bit in the intro about its use on Tiritiri Matangi Island isn't followed up in the text, but I haven't got a good source yet that goes into the reasons for its use there. Maybe the tone is a tad wordy/formal. Anyway, it's your thoughts that count. Mucho appreciado. Kahuroa (talk) 11:02, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Have gone live with Cordyline australis. Let me know what you think and where from here. Cheers Kahuroa (talk) 05:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Review of closure process 2
Because you've contributed to FPC either recently or in the past, I'm letting you know about the above poll on the basis of which we may develop proposals to change our procedures and criteria. Regards, Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 12:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Bird
Nice article, and it looks good on the front page. Congrats. :) SlimVirgin  talk  contribs 17:35, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Saxaul Sparrow
Can you check the HBW entry for this species, or send me a copy some time? Once this article is checked against the HBW or some other recent source, I'll send it to FAC. Thanks, &mdash;innotata 18:49, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Huia and Kiwi collabs - THIS SHIT JUST GOT REAL!
Hey man. I was thinking today that all I really do is talk about collabs and that I should hurry up and just do one. I will have lots of free time from saturday the 3rd of july onwards. I was thinking a group of us - me, you, kahuroa and casliber - could agree on a suitable time period and then start ripping into a couple of NZ bird articles. I'm thinking Huia first because it is so close to FA already and then "Kiwi" - because it is so lacking presently and yet so important; I mean for crying out loud, it gets like 2k views a day. What do you think? when suits for you? and how do collabs work in general/is there anything I need to know? Cheers, Kotare (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No need to bug you further over HBW
I was just about to bug you again about this a week or a few ago, when you were editing a bit more than you have recently have. However, I've just found that one library here has just bothered to get the latest three volumes—and I had already planned to go there this weekend. I might be able to return the favour you paid me helping with the book for Chestnut Sparrow—I can get at almost all issues of I think all the major ornithology journals now, even the BBOC, British Birds, and the Avicultural Magazine. &mdash;innotata 00:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Loco
Sorry I think I got a bit confused there on the Huia FAC page, I thought you were being acerbic, apparently not. I am sorry to read you're a bit ill, I've been having some health troubles too lately *sigh!*. This has been causing a little background stress which is probably partly why I got the wrong end of the stick so quickly and is why I scapered for a week or so - because I thought wikipedia was going to start adding to that stress. All the best for you! Kotare (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Zino's
Just what the species didn't need. Thanks for that, although it's not the best of news.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  05:53, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Assessment
Thank you very much! You are so right, I was not even close to catch that important detail. Osplace 21:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Announcement
Hello! I'm The Arbiter, one of the coordinators for WikiProject Zoo. I am proud to announce the launch of a new portal: Portal:Zoos and Aquariums! ZooPro, ZooFari, and I worked hard to create a new portal for information on zoos, aquariums, and the associated projects and articles on Wikipedia. If you could head on over, take a look at our work, and maybe learn some more about zoos and Wikiproject Zoo, it would be great! Cheers and Happy Editing!

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of The Arbiter (talk) at 03:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC).

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on January 4, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/January 4, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director,. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch ™ and ©  06:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

 

The antbirds are a large family of passerine birds found in forests across subtropical and tropical Central and South America, from Mexico to Argentina. There are more than 200 species, known variously as antshrikes, antwrens, antvireos, fire-eyes, bare-eyes and bushbirds. They are related to the antthrushes and antpittas (family Formicariidae), the tapaculos, the gnateaters and the ovenbirds. Antbirds are generally small birds with rounded wings and strong legs. They have mostly sombre grey, white, brown and rufous plumage, which is sexually dimorphic in pattern and colouring. Some species communicate warnings to rivals by exposing white feather patches on their backs or shoulders. Most have heavy bills, which in many species are hooked at the tip. Insects and other arthropods form the most important part of their diet, although small vertebrates are occasionally taken. Most species feed in the forest understory and midstory, although a few feed in the canopy and a few on the ground. To various degrees, around eighteen species specialise in following columns of army ants to eat the small invertebrates flushed by the ants, and many others may feed in this way opportunistically. Thirty-eight species are threatened with extinction due to human activities. The principal threat is habitat loss, which causes habitat fragmentation and increased nest predation in habitat fragments. (more...)

your recent comments
Hi, Sunbird. Unless you are accusing me of violating some wikipedia policy, please address issues regarding an article on that article's talk page. I will answer your recent comments at the talk page for Kagu. Please maintain a civil tone. My minor edits were hardly personal attacks. Out of the blue comments like "so what?" are easily interpreted as unfriendly. μηδείς (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I do not welcome discussion of articles on my talk page.


 * You seem to be unaware that editors are free to delete comments from their own pages. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk#Others.27_comments "Personal talk page cleanup: On your own user talk page, you may archive threads at your discretion. Simply deleting others' comments on your talk page is permitted, but most editors prefer archiving. Many new users believe they can hide critical comments by deleting them. This is not true: Such comments can always be retrieved from the page history. Removal of a comment is taken as proof that the user has read it."


 * Please cease this behavior, it is unwelcome. μηδείς (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For someone concerned about me being unfriendly, you're pretty hostile. You said You seem to be unaware that editors are free to delete comments from their own pages. Dude, I didn't say you couldn't do it, I just said it was rude. Rude. Notice how that is spelt differently from "Against the rules", which would have implied that I was indeed unaware that editors are free to delete comments. If you had read further I even acknowledged that this may be personal taste. This is also strong evidence that I was aware it was allowed and was making a personal observation. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  23:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

thanks
Thanks for the notification of the discussion. I figured the issue was closed - since I used your own suggestion of unbolding the alternate spelling.

So far as the article goes, I had thought to redraw some skecthes from published images of the bird in a display pose with the wing stripes and crest visible, but have run into no end of problems with my scanner and image manipulation capabilities. Curious if you have a source lined up for better pictures, or if I should keep trying.μηδείς (talk) 00:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Albatross
Hi! I´m reading the article about albatross (good job!!) and y can´t understand the sentence "due to the dimished life-time reproductive success it causes" when talk about the "divorce" in the "Breeding and dancing" section. Sorry my english, but, what means dimished life-time reproductive succes? I can´t find the meaning for dimished. Thanks in advance, and I hope not disturb you. Greetings from Spain,--Furado (talk) 18:30, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It was a typo for diminished, which I've just fixed. &mdash;innotata 19:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh!, I am sorry not to have seen it. Thank you very much. --Furado (talk) 23:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Helmet Vanga
I thought I'd let you know that I'm going to be getting some very nice photos of the Helmet Vanga soon, in case you want to consider working on that article. It would also compliment the Marojejy National Park article I'm working on today. Just a thought, since I know you love birds. –  VisionHolder « talk » 16:38, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
I really like that picture of the firewood-gatherer's nest, thanks for adding it! :) --HoopoeBaijiKite 05:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: Hatnotes and Black Swan
There actually isn't anything in regards to having two or more hatnotes on the one page, so yes, having them both there is allowed. However, I removed the second hatnote because of the fact that the film was given on the disambiguation page, and as such having a separate hatnote solely for the film seems to be undue focus to a specific film. If you feel that having a separate link to the film is necessary, then I will integrate it into the upper hatnote. --JB Adder | Talk 07:51, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Thought You Might Enjoy The Article
http://10000birds.com/birding-wellington-new-zealand-part-one.htm

BTW, the first time I have had any indication that a split of the New Zealand Robin was in the offing. I usually keep myself pretty much abreast.

Cheers, Steve

Thanks for the recommendation!

Especially since I wrote the post! I now have my own column on that blog. Glad to see some people are reading it!

Yes, I had figured it out!

Steve Pryor (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Pitta
I saw this and thought it close to GA. Cas said you are familiar with this article and a joint GA would be a good idea. If you're up for that, I'd gladly help. Let me know. BarkingMoon (talk) 21:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd like to help. I am new and haven't done a GA before, but please let me know what I can help with. Cas and I have two Pittas at DYK nom now and I have a plan to do other Pitta expansions. They're very pretty. Aren't there bots that do dash type fixes and such?BarkingMoon (talk) 22:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * See suggestions by Jim on my talk point. He made excellent suggestions.BarkingMoon (talk) 11:16, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Common Diving-petrel
Is it okay if I set refs here up using the |r template that I've been using? BarkingMoon (talk) 01:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Common Diving-petrel is at DYK now. Want to dual it with the South Georgia petrel? BarkingMoon (talk) 13:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Too bad I can't find a free pic of either. BarkingMoon (talk) 13:29, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Expanded South Georgia and made it a dual. BarkingMoon (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Common Diving-petrel
Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Henderson Petrel
Casliber directed me, after I made a request on his page about some expansion I did here. He tells me you are our resident expert on these, and wonder if you could therefore be so kind as to look over the points I raised with him? In anticipation, thanks.Nishidani (talk) 06:58, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Bird
Stop making demands on my talk page. There is no consensus for your reversion, the image has stood for months, your rude demands at wikimedia that I "fix" the image to please you are wel remembered and I have no problem with you doing so yourself. μηδείς (talk) 23:24, 15 July 2011 (UTC)


 * You are acting in clear violation of the consensus for a composite, which does not preclude you from providing a better one. I have posted an RfC and suggest you await consensus or will file an AN3 report for edit warring. μηδείς (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively. Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.
 * 1) Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

RE: Sorry dude
User:Grawp messing with the Template:Taxobox. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  02:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Bryan's Shearwater
Just started a stub. Up your alley. Shyamal (talk) 11:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Bird 1304.
Hi, I wonder if you have any information about the colour of the irises of Tawny Frogmouths; see WP Birds talk page. Snowman (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Genus authors
I have been thinking about writing in genus authors, which you raised as a possible task for semi-automated software. Thank you for answering some problems on genus authors. A particular format for the genus authority and date seems to be imply something. Do you know what exactly needs to be added to the infobox, and what are the rules about writing the genus authors? It is probably best to reply on the WP Birds talk page. Snowman (talk) 20:39, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pied Monarch
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:03, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Sickle-billed Vanga
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

WP Tree of Life in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Tree of Life for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

List of birds of South Africa
Thanks for updating this list. JMK (talk) 12:12, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Bustards
http://www.worldbirdnames.org/n-bustards.html The funny thing is they said wikiproject birds will adopt their policy. http://www.worldbirdnames.org/reactions.html Forgive me if my methods are bit dated, haven't been on here for a while as member and all of these new upgrades...--4444hhhh (talk) 15:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Noisy Miner
I'd appreciate it if you have time to cast a critical eye over the Noisy Miner article which I have just expanded. Thanks Marj (talk) 22:13, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The bird caps issue
Let's just talk about this a bit in person; forum posts tend to lead to polemics. This is a bit of an essay, because there's years and years of complex dispute to cover, not to mention the current issue at WT:MOS which actually has precious little to do with birds.

Part of the problem is this attitude: "God knows we're sick of you trying to impose conformity where it isn't wanted." It reeks of WP:OWN. 'These are articles, and we're the bird people, and your opinion does not matter. Get out.' Virtually every time, over the last 5 or so years that you've commented on this issue when it's been raised, at WT:BIRDS, WT:MOS, WP:VPP, etc., etc., you have conveyed this elitist, dismissive attitude. Or a fairer statement would be that you've written in a way that very strongly lends itself to an elitist interpretation. It isn't just you. Earlier in this debate, someone, I think it was Kim, essentially said were all ignorant and should STFU, just in politer words. Here, I found it: "No, it [capitalization] is controversial [on Wikipedia] because people who have no knowledge about the bird conventions try to push a general rule on a group that has a very explicit and clear different way of Capitalizing." There are several very noteworthy things about that comment, even aside from the incivility of the assumption of ignorance. Firstly, it's an ad hominem attack and a handwave. I've see this exact same tactic used several times in WT:BIRDS archives against critics or even questioners of the capitalization. The problem is that the critics actually demonstrate that the understand perfectly well what the external conventions are in bird literature; this makes the argument trebly fallacious, as a straw man, then. The second important element is "pushing a general rule on a group", which is what I've quoted you saying, just in different wording. It's a sentiment that your project is a sovereign entity that gets to control bird articles and everything about bird articles. Long-standing policy says you are dead wrong on this. The of MOS is "pushing rules on groups" who all have different preferences, wildly different ones, so that there is one set of rules we all agree to, inevitably not agreeing  every single one of them all the time. Without this, we would have utter, stupid chaos and an encyclopedia that read like a thousand people's blogs stirred in a pot. The third important element is that the "group" (as if it were an organization with membership conditions and an entrance exam) "has a very explicit and clear different way". This is the very reason WP:LOCALCONSENSUS policy exists. No one cares about local consensuses 90% of the time; the project I most participate in, WP:CUE, depends heavily on them (e.g. the game name is nine-ball, not "9-ball" or "nineball" or "9ball" or "Nine-Ball" or...) But when these local consensuses conflict with wider consensus, as a matter of official Wikipedia policy. ArbCom has enforced this against projects more than once.

I believe that you and several others at your project are missing the forest for the trees. These aren't articles, and "there's no 'where' there", to paraphrase an old poem, when you say "where" in "where it isn't wanted". WP:BIRDS is an illusory abstraction. It is not a place, a club, a secret society, an authority, or anything other than a page of text at which editors with a common interest in birds have agreed to collaborate. You do not get to make up your own rules against the wider-spread consensus, like MOS's clear instructions against upper-casing animal names. This is a matter of clearcut policy at LOCALCONSENSUS. Whether you and other birders "want" (your word) this style or that is irrelevant. This is an encyclopedia not your personal playground, with a uniform, consistent set of guidelines. Since the vast bulk of the readership expects normal English, guess what the MOS is going to recommend? Everyone involved very well understands your argument that the bird guidebooks and journals "all" (that isn't actually true, and you know that) capitalize, but that's not relevant for WP purposes. The insider publications on almost everything capitalize Things They Think Are Important, and WP ignores them, as do all other mainstream publications, because it's silly nonsense outside its specialist context. I'll break here, since this is actually kind of a discrete subtopic of its own.

At this point, I've just thrown up my hands about WP:BIRDS. You're so entrenched on this issue that there's no point fighting you any longer; no minds are going to change. Why you fight so hard about it is beyond me, especially since MOS is just a guideline. You should just let MOS never mention your project at all, have clean, unencumbered "lower case common names" wording, and then simply cite WP:IAR and go about your merry way. It would probably turn into an ArbCom case, and you might well win on that basis. It will almost inevitably turn into an ArbCom case anyway, but if your project continues to be obstructionist to legitimate, good faith attempts to clean up guideline conflicts, or to game the system by manipulating one guideline so you can hide behind it and ignore another, that's going to look far, far worse when the case eventually happens. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 03:25, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

The current MOS issue
Anyway, with regard to the current issue: What you're completely missing is that I'm going out of my way to ensure that MOS carves out your niche and leaves you alone! It is hardly my, mind you – it almost sickens me to do it – but seven years of strife over this issue is more than plenty for Wikipedia, and I'd just as soon have an end to it, at least for the immediate future. My actual priority here, by 1000%, is putting a stop to the proliferation of rampant capitalization of every other mention of animals, and to get rid of the conflicting sub-guideline language at MOS:CAPS, WP:FNAME, etc., that encourages projects to go off into left field and make up more exceptions (which is a of WP:LOCALCONSENSUS policy; not on purpose - the advice to do so just predates that policy and hasn't been cleaned up yet). is "Johnson had a Rock Pigeon but it was eaten by his Ball Python, who choked to death on it, so he instead got a Dog and two Goldfish." Even your own project would not capitalize rock pigeon here, since this snippet is clearly from a hypothetical biographical not orn. article. Every day I find articles with random animal names capitalized in them, from Przewalski's horse to St. John's water dog, both of which I cleaned up myself. There are thousands more. Your project is partially responsible for the spread of this, and I do take you to task for it (with good reason; I've seen WP:BIRDS members actively promote the capitalization of all common names at WT:TOL and elsewhere), but that's not the real point. The inconsistent guidelines are the point, and all the flaming that Kim and other members of your project are doing, including absurd straw men like one of them claiming we're saying that capitalization isn't a common practice in bird publications, either because he totally misunderstood the proposal or is intentionally trying to cloud the debate, is hindering the process of cleaning up this mess. if you'll just let it.

The one thing MOS is not going to do for you is about the fact that your capitalization practice is controversial on Wikipedia. It's been proven beyond any shadow of doubt to be one of the longest running and hottest controversies on the entire system. It is normal, standard practice at MOS to annotate controversies when they affect advice within its scope. I'll be happy to cite you several examples. The idea that you're going to get your exception (if DarkFrog has his way – he's way more antagonistic toward your project's typography than even I am – you won't even get that) without it somehow being flagged as controversial is a pipedream. Not because anyone has it out for you, but because it's simply true, and MOS's job isn't to brown-nose WikiProjects, it's to provide consistent, reliable style advice for what to do.

I hope this helps explain where I'm coming from better. I don't have anything personal against you. I don't like what your project does with capitals, and I don't like how your project has gamed the system and otherwise abused policy and process in various ways. But all that pales in comparison to the real issue, which is guideline consistency that puts a stop to people capitalizing Grey Wolf and Domestic Cat and Neon Tetra. You probably don't notice it, but it's a massive problem all over Wikipedia, and it greatly hurts our credibility. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 03:25, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Doozie
It's a huge reply, because so many issues were raised at once. I'm going to bed, so feel free to read (or ignore) at your leisure; I'm not hanging on the keyboard for a reply or anything. The short version is: I can't promise I'll never speak out against bird caps again, because I don't think it suits a general encyclopedia, but the MOS stuff going on right now is about stopping rampant caps all over the place, with no rationale, not going after WP:BIRDS, which actually provides a reasonable rationale (even if I and many others don't find it compelling; but it's not random nonsense). I've sacrificed my "stop the bird caps" position in favor of a compromise to "firewall" your project a) for its own protection, at least for a while (until someone with more fangs that I have, like DarkFrog, goes after you again, which is out of my control), not because my mind's changed but because the strife level is unproductive; and b) way more importantly to me, to get a stable base from which to synch all the relevant guidelines and stop capitalization of things like "Guinea Pig" and "Przewalski's Horse" and "Brown Bear" and "Moutain Dog" in their tracks. It will take forever to clean up, but cleanup will not be possible if the creation of more mess isn't staunched. WP:FNAME, essentially says "screw it! make up your own rules!" in less flippant wording of course – a holdover from the days before WP:LOCALCONSENSUS, but being read and trusted and acted upon by people capitalizing the crap out of everything alive. However, and this is crucial, MOS endorse the WP:BIRDS practice, only observe that it exists and that controversy exists about it. To do otherwise (and I mean both parts of that, the pro and the con) would not only be a lie, it would open up a Pandora's Rule Exception Box for every project on the system to demand exceptions for anything they felt like, and perhaps most importantly at the process level, it would violate MOS's scope; MOS does not have the authority to declare the debate about bird caps "over" or declare what the outcome of that debate is. MOS isn't ArbCom; likewise, ArbCom can't tell us how to use quotation marks, which is MOS's job. I grok your criticisms, and I feel personally bad that Kim almost left over the dispute (though, ultimately, I cannot control his/her emotions, and not everyone is suited to debate). The rest of the reply (in biggish bullet paragraphs) is mostly about things like why your project meets so much resistance, whether the other projects considering cap caved or changed their minds independently, us vs. them attitudes, and lot of other meta-issues that may be of interest, but aren't about what to do right now. I believe all of them are civil, though a few are critical. If you feel otherwise please say so. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 07:15, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear Sabine's Sunbird,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Young June Sah --Yjune.sah (talk) 04:28, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Bird names guidance text
Curious what you think of WikiProject Birds/naming sandbox — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿ ¤ þ  Contrib.  12:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary
Wishing Sabine&#39;s Sunbird a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Light sooty albatross nesting.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Light sooty albatross nesting.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:45, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Bleuh. Can't find the email. I did have permission, but I think this was pre OTRS days. Buh-bye image. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  20:51, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

pelican
Hey I have updated the NZ material per sources as suggested. Having a problem finding material on the family as a whole...especially on anatomy. Any suggestions welcome. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:55, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Ashy Storm-petrel
Hey there Sabine's! Quick question...  Do you have a reference for your sentence in Ashy Storm-petrel which says that "one authority" suggests naming this bird after Elliott Coues? It's been questioned with a "verify source" tag, and I can't find any book or journal which uses this name (or indeed even the justification for this name). Can you help? MeegsC (talk) 23:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! Any chance you have a page number? MeegsC (talk) 01:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

TFA
Your bird flying --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Golden White-eye
This is a note to let the main editors of Golden White-eye know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 5, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/December 5, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Golden White-eye is a species of bird in the white-eye family Zosteropidae. It is the only species within the genus Cleptornis. The Golden White-eye was once considered to be a honeyeater in the family Meliphagidae and although it is now known to be a white-eye, its position within that family is still uncertain. The species is restricted to the islands of Saipan and Aguijan in the Northern Mariana Islands, where it is sympatric (shares its range) and competes with the related Bridled White-eye. The Golden White-eye has golden plumage and a pale eye-ring. It feeds on insects, fruit, and nectar and forages in pairs or small family groups. The bird is monogamous and lays two eggs in a small cup nest. Fossil evidence shows the Golden White-eye once also occurred on Tinian and Rota but was extirpated in those locations through the impact of human activities. Despite its current abundance on Saipan and Aguijan, and the fact that it has among the highest recorded densities for any bird, it is nevertheless considered to be critically endangered. It is threatened by the invasive Brown Tree Snake, which has recently become established on Saipan; efforts are under way to control the snakes and breed the white-eye in zoos. (Full article...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Precious
<div style="margin: auto; max-width: 60em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba( 192, 192, 192, 0.75 ); border-radius: 1em; border: 1px solid #a7d7f9; margin-bottom: 1em; padding: 0.5em 1em 1em; color: black;" class="ui-helper-clearfix"> <div style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; background-color: #ddd; border: 5px solid #ddd; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); border-radius: 0.5em;"> birds

Thank you for quality articles on birds, such as the Golden White-eye, for you major contributions to Bird, and for having "managed to not destroy Wikipedia yet", - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (29 December 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2012 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 325th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:30, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Composite image
Hi! Would you care to share your opinion about the composite/single infobox image issue here? I would really appreciate it. Thanks! --Life is like a box of chocolates (talk) 01:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Procellariiformes/GA1
Thought this might be your cup of tea...and help it just in the nick of time....Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:38, 2 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I've taken the GA on as it seems to have been a drive-by nomination, and the article feels pretty much ready. I've inexpertly located refs (google, JSTOR), and have managed to support all the text except for some of the analysis of the fossil record. I'll therefore apologise in advance for removing a couple of paragraphs of that and writing a brief passage which I've been able to source - hope it will suffice to hold the fort until, perhaps, you feel like doing a better job of it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Hallo again, the GA reviewer has listed a few points made by Brittanica on the Procellariiformes, saying "Britannica mentions some interesting facts which might be added to enhance our article: (don't feel compelled to add them, I'm partially thinking out loud)". I'll have a go at them but would be very pleased if you could see if any of them are worth your attention. Perhaps #7: '"The oldest tubinare fossil is a giant albatross (Gigantornis) from the Eocene Epoch (about 50 million years ago) of Nigeria." - this contradicts what we have'? I suspect EB is out of date/has a doubtful fossil here? Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Procellariiformes - is that Brooke?
The first paragraph of this section states many facts but only gives 2 refs.... I suspect all of it came from something like Brooke, so it would likely be much easier if you could do this one - I've fielded some dozens of Sasata's perceptive review comments, it all seems to be going quite well really. I suspect it would be best also if you could add a bit on Feeding and on Taxonomy, but we may be able to get by without! Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Common Starling
Hi, I was wondering if you had any further queries at the Common Starling FAC, it all seems to have gone a bit quiet there, cheers, <b style="font-family:chiller; color:red;"> Jimfbleak - </b> talk to me?  07:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Georgia (country) to Georgia move suggestion
Please comment here. Thanks. georgian JORJADZE 18:21, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Million Award
The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

I hope things improve soon with your health, and thanks again for your terrific contributions. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)