Talk:Grey plover

Requested moves

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved by Materialscientist. --BDD (talk) 18:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

• Grey Plover → Grey plover
• Eurasian Oystercatcher → Eurasian oystercatcher
• Black Oystercatcher → Black oystercatcher
• American Oystercatcher → American oystercatcher
• Marbled Godwit → Marbled godwit
• Long-billed Dowitcher → Long-billed dowitcher
• Short-billed Dowitcher → Short-billed dowitcher
• Snowy Plover → Snowy plover
• Black-winged Stilt → Black-winged stilt
• White-headed Stilt → White-headed stilt

– Invert the redirections as the consensus and guidelines recommend not to capitalise the common (vernacular) names of species. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Bird common name decapitalisation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Animals, plants, and other organisms. Coreyemotela (talk) 09:32, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• Support, finally. If this is proceeding according to some category-walking patterns, be it taxonomic or geographical, that seems like a good idea. Anyone who's taking on the downcasing in the actual article text, please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds#The conversion is challenging; there are devils in the details. There's talk elsewhere of using bots or AWB scripts to move a lot of these articles and decapitalize within them, but I suspect this will be difficult to sort out, and the work might as well get started manually while that is worked up. A deeper question is how many of these are at IOC names that are not actually the WP:COMMONNAMEs, and thus need a different kind of move, for article titling policy reasons (many IOC names are made up by IOC and are unattested outside their own materials. Sometimes the scientific name is most common, in other cases other English-language or assimilated non-English names are common and the IOC ones are neologisms. In most cases the IOC names are fine.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  19:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
• Y Pages were moved by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). Coreyemotela (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Replace infobox image

The non-breeding image is clearer and a better depiction of the species. Non-breeding is the more "normal" state. I propose interchanging the breeding and non-breeding images in the article. @Needsmoreritalin: As you had added these images, would appreciate your views. Tagooty (talk) 03:10, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the non-breeding image is a better photo. Better lighting, less heat distortion and I was closer to the subject when I shot it. I guess the breeding image is usually "sexier" (if your a bird at least) but have no objection to the swap and appreciate any changes that improve an article. - Thank you! Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:53, 1 November 2024 (UTC)