Talk:Lesser Antillean macaw

(Redirected from Talk:Lesser Antillean Macaw)
Latest comment: 6 years ago by FunkMonk in topic Lesser Antillean macaw
Featured articleLesser Antillean macaw is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 9, 2018.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 2, 2013Good article nomineeListed
May 14, 2016Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Untitled

edit

--- Ara (sic!) sp. !??? ---

Is this some kind of sarcastic comment?

first sign your comments. and secondly no. The term sic! was common by some biologists until the 19th century for first scientific descriptions. --Melly42 (talk) 09:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Lesser Antillean Macaw/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 05:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC) This article is almost ready for becoming a GA. Just a few trifles I noticed:Reply

  • I think you should mention about the species' binomial authority in the lead. A line would do.
  • At places you mention the surnames of some people which seem to be writers or ornithologists : Valdes, Woods, Steadman, Olson, Maíz; also Julian Hume and Johann Huttich. Need a link or a word about their occupation.
Fine with Valdes and Huttich. I just saw that the citation following the others' names are articles by them only. Then I don't think you need to mention their names, as naturally the claim you mention is supported by the article's authors. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Which ones? I've named authors where there was disagreement, since it is good to know who says what, and is in favour of which theory. Much of what is claimed is somewhat controversial and impossible to prove, so I think it's good to know when only a few authors or one have proposed something. But I could remove their first names second time they're mentioned, as it was originally? FunkMonk (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
No, let it be as it is. Looks fine so. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 14:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • This species was described as being similar in colouration to the Scarlet Macaw, but with shorter tail feathers, as these were 18 or 15–20 inches long.[10] The tail feathers of the Scarlet Macaw are 2 feet long, and also differ by having blue tips, with the outer feathers being almost entirely blue The two measurements need convert templates. Add the template in the lead as well.
  • I could not clearly know when the bird was confirmed extinct. At least when the IUCN listed it as Extinct.
  • Human flesh links to the dab page anthropophagy; I could have fixed it, but I couldn't find a proper link in the page to convey its meaning.

Very few issues, we could get through these soon. Cheers, Sainsf <^>Talk all words 05:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Issues should be fixed now. The source did not state who Valdes was, but I'm pretty sure it is Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo y Valdés. FunkMonk (talk) 07:35, 1 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Good progress! One left to fix. Sainsf <^>Talk all words 12:59, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, I've added a comment above, since I'm not sure exactly what is meant. FunkMonk (talk) 13:06, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
You have fixed all issues. I think it is worthy for being a GA. Congrats! Sainsf <^>Talk all words 14:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

Removed text

edit

Off topic text per WP:COATRACK:

In the same paper, they doubted the validity of another hypothetical extinct, sympatric parrot, the Guadeloupe Amazon (Amazona violacea), arguing it was also probably identical to the Imperial Amazon.[1] Baffle gab1978 (talk) 19:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think I'll re add it and see what the reviewers think in a potential FAC. FunkMonk (talk) 23:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

IUCN status

edit

It would appear the IUCN has removed this form their website? Maybe they don't find it valid anymore? FunkMonk (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Appears they don't find it valid[1], but the recently described subfossil may change this. Here their earlier entry is archived:[2] FunkMonk (talk) 14:22, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

This page says: "This taxon is Not Recognised as a species by BirdLife International". Maybe on the next update it will change. Dr. Lenaldo Vigo (talk) 02:09, 11 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I was thinking along the same lines... Though I think such changes can take years... FunkMonk (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lesser Antillean macaw. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

The link to the Williams article goes to a different article about bats instead. Brutannica (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Strange, removed link. FunkMonk (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Lesser Antillean macaw

edit

Just curious, but what's the opposite? Is there a Greater Antillean macaw? :) - Floydian τ ¢ 19:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Though this is of course in jest, it touches on something that has annoyed me. Since this bird is only known from Guadeloupe, but other species of macaw may have lived on other Lesser Antillean islands, it should really be called the Guadeloupe macaw, since there would be other Lesser Antillean macaws. But that name is the official name according to BirdLife International. By that logic, the Cuban macaw could just as well have been called the "Greater Antillean macaw", as Cuba is part of the Greater Antilles... It is probably because this bird was also once thought to have lived on both Guadeloupe and Martinique, hence it would need a name implying a wider range... FunkMonk (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
  1. ^ Olson, S. L. (2008). "New evidence of Ara autochthones from an archeological site in Puerto Rico: a valid species of West Indian macaw of unknown geographical origin (Aves: Psittacidae)" (pdf). Caribbean Journal of Science. 44 (2): 215–222. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)