Talk:Mallard/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Breeding Description

Shouldn't the section on breeding habits have a little more detail about the "normal" breeding habits of mallards? Neutrality would seem to require that all of the more interesting and usual stuff be placed in some sort of perspective.

What's with this sex description? It belongs in some topic like animal sexuality and not in an encyclopedic description of a bird. It's one thing to have a short sentence on it's unusual sex habits but entirely another to explicitly and repeatedly describe them. It's definitely out of balance and not a neutral point of view. TimWhitehouse 05:36, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I've tried to make this section more balanced and anthropomorphic. "Rape" is inappropriate for an animal that is simply responding to instinct. If the person who is so keen on this bit is unhappy, perhaps the suggestion of moving it to a topic such as suggested above is appropriate.

jimfbleak 16:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Rather than delete sections like this, we normally move them to the talk page until someone can make use of them.

Section moved from main article

Mallards are among the very few animals that practice forcible rape. When they pair off with mating partners, often one or several drakes will end up "left out". This group will sometimes target an isolated female duck — pestering and pecking at her until she weakens (a phenomenon referred to by researchers as attempted rape flight), at which point each male will take turns raping the female.

As of 2005, a Dutch researcher, Kees Moeliker, has won an Ig Nobel prize for his paper on ‘homosexual necrophilia in the Mallard Anas platyrhynchos’. "Rape is a normal reproductive strategy in Mallards," explains Mr Moeliker. He recounts in his paper that he heard the bang of a duck hitting a window outside his office in the Natuurmuseum Rotterdam: "I went downstairs immediately to see if the window was damaged, and saw a drake mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) lying motionless on its belly in the sand, two metres outside the facade. The unfortunate duck apparently had hit the building in full flight at a height of about three metres from the ground. Next to the obviously dead duck, another male Mallard (in full adult plumage without any visible traces of moult) was present. He forcibly picked into the back, the base of the bill and mostly into the back of the head of the dead Mallard for about two minutes, then mounted the corpse and started to copulate, with great force, almost continuously picking the side of the head."

By the way, judging from the quotes, it looks like this story in the Guardian may have been the source for much of this information. -- Solipsist 18:20, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok there is now just one mention of the term "rape flight". If you can rape the land you can rape a duck. It's a pretty flexible word.--Gbleem 20:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I should say that the only google source I could find for "rape flight" was the Moeliker paper or items pointing to it. Is it a real term used by ornathologists? --Gbleem 20:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Much improved. By the way there is an article on Animal sexuality and a section on birds where perhaps the above cut out section could go if someone were inclined to do that. TimWhitehouse 00:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC).

Ducklings

We've recently got a large increase in the number of duckling pictures. However although the yellow one is cute, is it actually a Mallard? Again in the 59 day juvenile picture, there is one duck which doesn't look much like a Mallard (or is that what makes it a Dutch Mallard). I imagine they are all from the same brood, so could this one be a cross. -- Solipsist 12:04, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Greenland Mallard

This form is not generally recognised as a separate species from the nominate race, either in Wildfowl or Handbook of the birds of the world. the only difference is size, which varies clinally. I propose changing the text to reflect this, but invite comments first. jimfbleak 16:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Is there a sub-species that can be cited here? Wonko the Sane 19:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Use as food

Should the fact that mallards are eaten as game be mentioned? 143.252.80.100 21:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes I would have thought so. Be bold, especially if you have a reference. However, we wouldn't want to imply that Mallards are a commonly eaten duck these days. In the UK at least, I think most duck meat sold in the shops is from domesticated Aylesbury ducks. -- Solipsist 21:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above, but wild Mallard can sometimes be obtained from specialist game outlets, although Teal, a better sporting bird, is more common. jimfbleak 06:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Certainly you can buy wild mallard at Waitrose, a 453453allard.asp I've eaten them, although not from a supermarket. I'll add a bit in the article. 143.252.80.100 12:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

No,this is about the bird,not duck huntin53453[User:70.165.71.229|70.165.71.229]] 23:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)534534

4534

Exactly, this is about the bird, so any relevent information should be added. The fact that it has a correlation with duck hunting is no reason for it to not be added. 121.219.117.46 (talk) 05:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Picture

5345 Can we have a main picture that has both a male and a female duck? Seems slightly "sexist" to have the male as the main picture.--Ķĩřβȳ♥♥♥Ťį534534Ø 06:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I am sure the Duck's rights/feminist Duck associations will be up and arms about it - maybe they will even boycott Wikipedia!! :)) It is just a picture, who cares? Baristarim 23:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)h75456436453434

I changed the picture. --Nenyedi ^TalkDeeds_@ 23:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

And I changed it again (though I agree with Baristarim), as the caption had been left as A Mallard drake. Yomangani^talk 00:09, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Capitalisation?

Shouldn't "mallard" normally be in lower case, like moorhen, coot, etc.? Pol098 12:31, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It's an agreed convention on wikipedia that all bird species are fully capitalised. Groups of birds like moorhen, coot or kingfisher are lower case, but Common Moorhen, American Coot and Stork-billed Kingfisher are capitalised. Jimfbleak 17:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

"Genetic pollution"

Can we get a rewrite? The present text is very much a gut-level appeal that has little to do with science.

Like elsewhere worldwide the invasive alien mallard ducks are also causing severe “genetic pollution” of South Africa’s biodiversity by breeding with endemic ducks.

How exactly do you "pollute" a "gene" (read: genome)? Has natural selection suddenly ceased to function? Are Mallard and YBD specially created baramins? The notion of "genetic purity" is knee-jerk nonsense; in South Afrika in particular such unscientific shite is best left to the AWB...

The hybrids of mallard ducks and the Yellow-billed Duck are fertile and can produce more hybrid offspring.

Or the can have lower fitness and have less offspring on averade than purebreds of either species. In which case the issue will a) resolve itself (on a purely genetic level, but see below) and b) actually improve fitness of the YBD population by introducing new alleles that may be beneficial. The crucial point is: mallards hybridizing around has been happening for 100,000s of years and apparently never caused problems.

If this continues, only hybrids will occur

Do we have data? Because the YBD and the Mallard are (among Anas sensu stricto) only very distantly related. The most parsimonious assumption is that hybrids are less vigorous than purebreds of either species, and this assumption must be falsified before such claims can be accepted.

The case of A. superciliosa on New Zealand shows that even between Mallards and (one of?) their sister species - they were a single species just a million years ago! - hybrid vigor is reduced. It has been shown that hybrids between the Mallard and the American "mallardines" are more likely to die from disease than either parent species. But the NZ case shows also what really is the underlying problem: habitat destruction.

So the real culprit is not the fictional "pollution" of the gene pool but the very real pollution and destruction of wetlands.

and in the long term this will result in the extinction of various indigenous waterfowl worldwide like the yellow billed duck of South Africa.

Oh really? Clairvoyance is real now or what?!

In short, it has been shown for the Mexican Duck, the Mottled Duck, the NZ Anas superciliosa, and Meller's Duck that the supposed "Mallard problem" is simply mallards piggybacking on wholesale habitat alteration. Preserve enough habitat, and the supposed "genetic pollution" will simply go away. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

High quality picture of male mallard

I have shoot a high quality picture of a male mallard, but since I don't know which picture to replace (if any) I'll leave it to you to include it in the article if appropiate.

Image: Mallard 080508.jpg

Link: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Mallard_080508.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soasta (talk • contribs) 16:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Social behavior?

There are a lot of mallards on-campus where I go to school and I've noticed them group up in rather odd ways. Though many are seen roaming around solo, I notice groups of one male and one female, two males, two males and one female, three males and one female, but never two females together or anywhere near a balanced mix of males and females in large groups (though I rarely see more than four in a group at one time). If this is common mallard behavior (females not "socializing" with other females, quite unlike the males), it would be worth mentioning in this article, IMO. RobertM525 (talk) 04:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Evolution

i am confused, the article says all duck species are derived from the mallard, but now the mallard is crowding out local species all over the world? if the mallard is crowding all of these other species out, how did the other species form in the first place? have mallards been manually introduced into new locations where they never went before? i feel like there is something missing from the article...(Torder (talk) 13:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC))

All domestic species (except the Muscovy) are descended from the Mallard. The species it's crowding out are wild species. thx1138 (talk) 19:43, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Footnotes

There are many dead links to footnotes in this entry. What happened to the footnotes?

Aleksandros (talk) 12:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Duckling waterproofing

I removed the sentence which said young ducklings weren't naturally waterproof (relying instead on their mothers for the necessary oils) as this Journal of Avian Biology article shows that information to be incorrect. MeegsC | Talk 20:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure young mallards are as waterproof as adults. Have a look at the two photos I shot at a small pond - an exception?

• 
  Male mallard with wet down
• 
  Same animal

Rror (talk) 21:58, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

the "royal" duck

isn't the mallard AKA the "royal" duck? If so, this article should mention it, and there should be a "Royal duck" redirect page to this article.
--Jerome Potts (talk) 06:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

A new picture

I have a mallard picture that I think would be good to download(in fact I have it as my desktop picture right now). Where should I go to upload it?8th sinn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8th sinn (talk • contribs) 15:42, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

In the left-hand column, there is a toolbox which contains a link to Upload file, click on that. Pnelnik (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Gallery

Galleries are discouraged on WP, so I added template Template:Cleanup-gallery to the section named Gallery. Since many images are relevant for the behavior of mallards, I propose remaking the section to a Behavior section adding text to illustrate various behaviors. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 21:05, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Please do so. This rather needs a behaviour section, preferably a well-researched one. I think the images can, however be removed—they all are, I trust, at Wikimedia Commons, so they can be added later. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 21:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree it needs a behavior section, and I think the pictures that demonstrate their behavior should be kept; but the repetitive ones that add nothing can be removed. TomCat4680 (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

This is what is typically done at the bird project. I'd like to work on this article, but I expect there would be too many disruptive editors etc. and I have other things to do on Wikipedia. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 22:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Innotata, please assume good faith. TomCat4680 (talk) 20:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

What are you refferring to? —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 02:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Your refusal to work on this article because you think there would be too much vandalism. That's assuming bad faith. I don't see a history of vandalism on this article anyway. TomCat4680 (talk) 02:07, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I should have phrased that differently—should I explain? Anyhow, I'll remove certainly extra images from the gallery and maybe propose this page as a collaboration for the birds project. —innotata (Talk • Contribs) 01:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Mallards in US in February?

My girlfriend swears she saw mallards in a creek here in Michigan today. But this article says they fly south to Mexico and Latin America between Sepember and May. What gives? TomCat4680 (talk) 20:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

She just found this picture of some mallards on a river surrounded by snow. TomCat4680 (talk) 20:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

We just went to the river and saw some. TomCat4680 (talk) 22:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Escaped and feral birds often don't show normal migration patterns (Canada Geese in the UK are largely sedentary). If ducks have access to open water and can get food (or are being fed) they don't have to move on. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 20:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. This should be mentioned in the article. TomCat4680 (talk) 21:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Spam

I just got rid of some spam on the top of the page. Donald202 (talk · contribs)

Mallard is collaboration for February 2011

Nominated December 6 2010;

1. Support: —focus 03:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
2. MeegsC | Talk 14:23, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
3. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 16:22, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
4. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments:

• Probably the best known duck in the world, and IMO it deserves a better article. —focus 03:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
• Yeah, and how it hybridizes etc. Lots to write about. Could be a pretty massive article. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Possibly objectionable turn of phrase?

The sentence "The mother will leave the juveniles, knowing that they can fully fend for themselves." (italicising is mine) may be objectionable on the grounds that it anthropomorphizes the evolutionary process. This objection has been made elsewhere in Wikipedia, eg, in the article about the Wombat. Old_Wombat (talk) 09:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Species?

According to most definitions of species, organisms fertilely (sp?) interbreeding are not different species, particularly when the interbreeding is taking place "naturally". Allens (talk) 15:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that. Occasional hybridisation does not mean that two mostly separate species are the same. Biologists have generally worked with different concepts of species for different groups of organisms, a looser definition for waterfowl considering how even obvious distant relatives (like Mallards and Canada Geese) can hybridise and how related species with comparatively extensive hybridisation can remain distinct. So most Anas species as listed on Wikipedia are about always considered separate despite varying levels hybridisation, and even the American Black Duck is usually separated as well (its article discusses this more though not very well). Also, a lot of this hybridisation with very close relatives is new, not totally natural. —innotata 15:21, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Umm... I'm a biologist. My dissertation was on phylogenetics. I didn't consider other Anas species to be separate for purposes of my research, if there was evidence for successful interbreeding. If significant gene flow takes place - and if it's allegedly threatening the separate existence of other "species", then it's significant (otherwise, that claim of threatening separate existences needs removing) - then phylogenetically, they aren't separate species... and ornithologists are not the only ones dealing with Anas species, so the phylogenetic definition of species is equally valid. Perhaps some mention should be made in the article that whether these are considered separate species is not unanimously agreed upon among biologists (phylogeneticists vs ornithologists)? I can't exactly cite my own dissertation [1], and can be described as someone too close to the subject given it even for other people's research, or I'd do it. Allens (talk) 15:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

What are you suggesting needs to be changed, and on the basis of what research? There hasn't been any research that I know of questioning on phylogenetic bases that the Mallard interbreeds with other distinct Anas species like the pintails, proposals for major lumping, let alone ones that have some acceptance. Taxa like American and Pacific Black Ducks are treated as Mallards with some frequency, but are much more widely considered distinct; the topic of interbreeding is normally discussed in terms of species. If you're suggesting that we should say that there is by definition none of this hybridisation, that taxa like the American Black Duck are not species with some certainty (rather than that they are usually recognised as distinct but sometimes classed with the Mallard), or that more distant relatives like pintails should be considered the same species, I can't imagine any grounds for that.

I assume Anas species would be separate according to the standard of reproductive isolation plus conditions that is relied on in taxonomy and some say is emerging as a hard definition (Tobias et al., 2010 doi:10.1111/j.1474-919X.2010.01051.x; Brooks and Helgen, 2010 doi:10.1038/467540a). Also, the article doesn't look to be that great in terms of discussing what's known about the hybridisation: I don't think the rates of hybridisation are very high in most cases, and that they would be major gene flow. Even with the Pacific Black Duck, more of the duck's decline may be from competition, and with the Black Duck hybridisation appears to be low in some regions as well as a result of human disturbance. —innotata 17:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Mallard in flight.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mallard in flight.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 01:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Anas platyrhynchos male female quadrat.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Anas platyrhynchos male female quadrat.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 3, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-08-03. 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. :) Thanks! —howcheng {chat} 17:30, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Picture of the day

A pair of Mallards, an easily recognized species of dabbling duck that is found throughout the temperate and subtropical Americas, Europe, Asia, and North Africa, as well as Australia and New Zealand. The male birds have a bright green head (during breeding season) and are grey on wings and belly, while the females are brown all over. Both sexes have blue speculum feathers. Mallards live in wetlands, eat water plants and small animals, and are gregarious. This species is the ancestor of almost all of the breeds of domestic ducks.Photo: Richard Bartz

My evaluation of of this article for Bio372

The article on the Mallard Duck looks fairly complete and follows the format of a typical WikiProject Birds article. There are plenty of pictures and there are even videos. A missing category that chapter 5 covers is competition for food. The article discusses the types of foods the ducks eat, but does not mention how ducks will settle into a stable distribution between feeding patches and reaches an ideal free distribution by examining the numerical prediction. It could also discuss how overall intake rate and prey mortality risk should equal out at feeding sites. The paper that the article could site is from David Harper (1982). Overall, the writing appears neutral and is clear. Looking at the talk page, an audio file would make the article more complete. Also the talk page shows that one of the pictures in the article was the picture of the day and represents a quality image. The mallard duck is part of many wikiproject pages. Looking at the history page, it seems as though the mallard duck article has undergone many revisions, having over 1000 changes. Compared to the other articles I looked at, it has far more even though it is only rated as a B class article, when others have already reached FA class. Zhangt2413 (talk) 19:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

"Jill"

Apparently, the female is called a "Jill" - I don't want to ruin a perfectly good entry, but perhaps someone could confirm this and include it in an appropriate place. 217.75.24.105 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:31, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Never heard of this, so I expect it's made up. Females are called "ducks", or sometimes "hens" —innotata 01:13, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

"Rape"

If forced copulation among ducks is considered rape, shouldn't it be murder when one drowns as a result? Marshalljc (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Even if emotive terms like rape are used, it wouldn't be murder since that assumes an intent to kill. Nor would it be manslaughter (duckslaughter?) since that would assume that a duck had the intellectual capacity to foresee the possible outcome of its actions. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:47, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

If a rapist accidentally kills a woman while raping her, I'm pretty sure he would be charged with her murder, but that's beside point. We don't call it murder when a non-human kills regardless of the circumstance for the same reason we shoulnd't talk about non-humans raping each other. Rape is the act of forcing sexual intercourse upon another person without their consent or against their will; originally conceived as a crime committed by a man against a woman, but now often extended (under various legal systems) to include other kinds of forced sexual activity by persons of either sex. Marshalljc (talk) 11:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

I propose that we add that the Mallard Duck is the only duck to practice Cannibalism, just for the hell of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BHUDS238 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Map of the Mallard duck's range needs correction.

The Mallard duck is shown as not inhabiting the island of Newfoundland (the large island on the eastern portion of Canada), yet they are in fact present in the province. Aside from the anecdotal evidence of seeing them myself there (which I know doesn't particularly count for that much), there are photos of mallards taken in Newfoundland and shared here[2] and here[3].

Andrew W 21:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew9623 (talk • contribs)

Travel

There is a little about range of winter travel in north America. Can more be found, to improve the article, about speed of flight, migration distances and even movements during a day? SovalValtos (talk) 19:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mallard/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay I will take a look. I will make straightforward changes as I go and jot questions below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:56, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Add what Anas boschas was/is.

 Done From Aves in the 10th edition of Systema Naturae, mallard being a redirect to Anas boschas, and few other online sources like this, it seems like Anas boschas is a synonym of the mallard. So, I mentioned it. here Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

err not quite, Synonym (taxonomy) means they are not current and needn't be mentioned in the lead. See how I have done it at turquoise parrot or banded stilt. Just mentioned. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I think I amended the issue now. Could you have a look at it? here Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Have a look at the External links policy and judge whether any of the current EL are useful or should all be canned (or used as inline references)

 Done I removed the all but two links, as they contained information already present in the article or they were talking about specific areas where mallards were present (which was not required, and also contained contentious information like the different clutch size, and the like, which could mislead the readers). However, two of them, which I did not remove, had rich media files. here Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

All web citations should have an accessdate, date (and better to have webarchive to preserve link when link dies), and author if possible. Also need to review and see which are possibly non-reliable. Generally better to replace with journals or reference books.

For the ones which do not have an accessdate, should I put them for the current day? There are only a few web citations (non-journals, non-papers) without accessdate, which I can review again and put the current day as accessdate. Adityavagarwal (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Cas Liber (talk · contribs)

 Done All the web citations and news (total 15) now have an accessdate, date, webarchive, and authors (not for all, as not every web citation mentioned the author) are present. I replaced other web citations with books/journals, for reliability; the web citations are now mostly iucn, nytimes, zoos, and the like. Adityavagarwal (talk) 01:18, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Why is this paper only in bibliography? Surely it should be used and referenced in the article itself.

 Done It was a bit difficult to include it in the article, as it spoke a lot (and only) about haplotypes of mallards (and such) birds. However, I managed to include it by modifying a sentence. here

Regarding jboyd's website, it is a great resource for checking on latest consensus of classification and its reference section has a list of papers used. It should not be used as a reference itself but as a pointer to the others.

You need to read and incorporate the Lavretzky paper of 2014.

 Done Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Are we sure there are not any morphological differences between new world and old world mallards?

 Done According to Lavretsky paper, there are few differences, due to which certian birds are more close to the OW mallard, and certian others to the NW mallard. I included that in the article, and cited the Lavretsky paper too. here Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

The clutch is 8–13 eggs, which are incubated for 27–28 days to hatching with 50–60 days to fledgling - you mean "fledging" here, right? Also needs a link.

 Done Wow. That was a subtle difference that you found out; really cool. Yup. I ameliorated the issue. Apparently, the citation had the word "fledgling" too. However, I removed that citation and put a new one instead. So, the complete sentence is cited again properly. Also, linked it.here Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

When they pair off with mating partners, often one or several drakes end up left out. - err, the ones that pair off are not the ones that are left out. Needs rewording.

 Done Yup. Reworded the sentence and merged it with another sentence. here Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:03, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

link clutch, incubation

You mean for this line? The clutch is 8–13 eggs, which are incubated for 27–28 days to hatching with 50–60 days to fledging. Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:09, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Have a read of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking - generally link at first instance in body of text. and also in lead. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Yup. I linked the two words. I thought you meant to refer to them with a citation (which was already done, so I knew you meant something else which I did not understand). I thought they were known as wikilinks (wikipedia links?). :P here Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Although these examples are not predators,... - unneeded. can be removed. You have said "threats" in the title anyway.

 Done I merged the two paragraphs and removed the mention of them not being predators. here Adityavagarwal (talk) 06:55, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

having subsections in the Regions considered invasive section makes it look too choppy.

 Done Now, they are in paragraphs, instead of being in separate subsections.Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Avoid galleries. You don't need multiple pictures of eggs or adult males for instance. Commons is for galleries (with a link at the bottom). Just choose images that highlight a particular aspect of the bird and place them through the text.

To chime in on this, see WP:Galleries. FunkMonk (talk) 08:11, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Thank You very much. :) (Also, seems like you used the indent that I made :P). The link was really useful. I actually thought of leaving this amended for the last; however, after reading the link, it seemed really easy to amend this issue. However, I am not able to position the image properly. Everything seems fine, except for the four images which have shifted downwards. Plate 221 of the Birds of America by John James Audubon., Calls, Iridescent speculum feathers of the male, and Owing to their highly 'malleable' genetic code, mallards can display a large amount of variation,[23] as seen here with this female, who displays faded or 'apricot' plumage. I tried a lot of combinations; however, this was the best what I could get to. They are not moving upwards. Adityavagarwal (talk) 09:56, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I'd probably prune even more images to solve the clutter issue, some of them seem repetitive. FunkMonk (talk) 19:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Adityavagarwal (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

That's what jumps out at me as necessary at first. Will check with other bird editors about content. Am trying to give this a big a push as possible towards FA-hood. It is a big complex subject, so keen to get it right. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thank you very much for all your mentions and your quick response. :) Adityavagarwal (talk) 06:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Casliber: I addressed to all the issues pointed out by you. Could you have a look at it? Thank You. Adityavagarwal (talk) 08:41, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. I need some time to digest it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

• Not thrilled about File:Mallard_Duck_Range.png as it does not distinguish between native and introduced ranges. Also needs more info on where data is from. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:34, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

This is the only other image at commons that I found, which had the global range of mallard, which might be from here. Other images that I found are here and here, between which the former has no specification of the colour distinction, and the latter has no separate ranges although seems reliable. So, should I remove the image, or change it with any of other? Though, if we compare the image in the article with these, they do seem to have similar ranges, for example, the northern canadian end ranges, etc. in the images seem similar. Adityavagarwal (talk) 13:02, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, remove for moment and we'll find a better sourced one I think. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Yup. Removed. Adityavagarwal (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Relationship with humans

Fried duck Bali

• The mallard has indeed had a long and important relationship with humans, concerning use for food, in hunting, as pets, and in children's stories, not to mention in art and illustrations. As such the current section is not adequate. Here are some suggestions: Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:50, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

--- Well, the section is vastly improved now, nice work! Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

All thanks to your input. Adityavagarwal (talk) 10:51, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• How about a subsection on food (See also link is not adequate), to mention smoked duck, canard a l'orange, peking (roast) duck with Chinese pancakes.

• A subsection on children's stories could mention and use an illustration (all PD) from The Tale of Jemima Puddle-duck along with what's already in the article, and there are certainly others.

The Tale of Jemima Puddle-duck seems like on ducks but not mallards specifically. So, would it be right to include it in the subsection? Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:25, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• In music, Peter and the Wolf, "the duck quacked angrily from the middle of the pond". On the oboe.

I searched a lot on this, but could not find if the duck used was actually mallard. Everywhere, it is mentioned duck. So, should I put it in the article? As it is an article on mallard, so would it be ok to still add it? Adityavagarwal (talk) 18:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Jemima Puddle-duck and Peter and the Wolf's duck are both certainly domestic ducks (and not Muscovy, despite the name they weren't known in Russia). Feel free to use both of them. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• 4 ships of the Royal Navy were named HMS Mallard.

• Better mention duck hunting.

• In art, where do we begin. Ancient Egypt, where domestic ducks were abundant? Bosch? In Japan and China, they were part of the Bird-and-flower painting tradition. In European (especially Dutch) still life painting, ducks are a common theme.

• 
  Ancient Egyptian duck in painted wood, Meidoun, c. 1st-3rd century
• 
  Hieronymus Bosch, The Garden of Earthly Delights, central panel - Detail Bird and Man riding a mallard
• 
  Mallard and French spaniel (a gun dog)
• 
  Marmaduke Cradock - Mallards on a Pond, before 1716
• 
  Pair of Meissen china mallards
• 
  Japanese woodblock print of Mallard and snow-covered reeds by Hiroshige, c. 1832
• 
  George Hetzel, Mallard still life painting, 1883-4

It is important to relate cultural items to mallards specifically, but for many that should be possible. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:44, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

• Also, I just realised we don't have a section on Domestic duck and how the mallard relates to it. It needs to be a summary as obviously we have a big article on Domestic duck. It could either go as a subsection (Domestication) of Taxonomy or the humans bit. Either would be okay. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:48, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Adityavagarwal (talk) 02:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: and @Casliber: I have addressed the issues mentioned. (Did not write about The Tale of Jemima Puddle-duck due to it being a duck, as I mentioned earlier, and the music too) Adityavagarwal (talk) 02:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, there are multiple overlapping articles. Still, the section as it now stands is clearly more appropriate. I'll step back now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

So, any other corrections required? Also, thanks a bunch for the ce and other corrections. Adityavagarwal (talk) 09:47, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

See Jemima and Peter above. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done Adityavagarwal (talk) 09:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Looks great to me. Let's hope the reviewer likes it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

• In the Domestication section, you mention peking duck (and I presume needs capital 'P') without explaining what it is.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
• Ref 116 shouldn't be in all capital letters.

• almost all varieties of domestic ducks except the muscovy duck, were derived from the mallard, and have been domesticated. - the last segment is unneeded as by stating "domestic" in the beginning you're covering that already..

• Maybe a few words on how domesticated ducks look different and why from mallards.

 Done @Casliber: Got them. Also, fixed the citation needed tag, by citing the sentence. Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:44, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Casliber: On one more reading, I found little ce's (one extraneous enter symbol in edit mode, strory->story, and one italicizing removal of hms mallard). Is there anything else that could be done to amend the article? Thanks. Adityavagarwal (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

NB: earwigs has what I suspect is a false positive from a Wikipedia mirror

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: - I think we're there. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:57, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Peking duck

I recently removed some stuff about Peking duck because that, like most other duck dishes, is normally made with the meat of domestic duck, not of this wild species. It's been put back in the article. Does it have any relevance here? I see no reference to mallard or any other wild duck in the sources cited. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Other trivia / not trivia at all, but part of living things in culture

OK, I've got my pedant hat on: isn't "mallard" an invariant noun (yes, I know that's a red link), like snipe, grouse, wigeon and so on? As in "there are mallard on the pond"?

There seems to be a good deal of fairly random trivia in the page – about musical compositions, about ships, about children's books. Does any of it tell us anything at all about this species? Wouldn't it be better placed in the respective articles on those topics? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:51, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps we could begin by steering clear of pejorative terms like "random trivia". Nothing in the article is random, i.e. by chance; and there is nothing trivial there, along the lines of momentary appearances by B-list starlets on single episodes of TV shows.

That said, it has been challenged, wrongly in my view, that domesticated mallards are no longer mallards. What are they then - a new species? No evidence for that - they interbreed freely, and have fertile offspring that we can see all over our lakes and rivers, part white, part wild-coloured.

It is right and proper for articles on taxa to cover their interactions with humans; there are a great many for living things in culture, and especially birds. The mallard was domesticated thousands of years ago in the birth of agriculture, and accordingly has a long history in the arts, literature, as food, and so on. These things are non-trivial, are richly documented in reliable sources, and should be covered in some detail in the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:18, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Many domestic ducks belong to domestic breeds, each of which has its own colours, behaviour, morphology and genotype. There are about 400 in this list, which is surely not complete and has many duplicates. They all (except for a few Muscovy Duck breeds) belong to the species Anas platyrhynchos, but they are no more "mallard" than a Jersey cow is an Aurochs, or a Silkie is a Red Jungle-fowl. I'd be happy to try help expand the coverage of domestic breeds here if that is wanted.

Ah, so we agree about the species, but you note that the English names have different extension. However, the article "Mallard" is the exact same article as the article on "Anas platyrhynchos", given that WP chooses to use common names where possible, so the cultural associations of the species A. platyrhynchos rightly belong here. They can indeed be described more fully at Domestic duck, which means we should simply summarize them briefly here with a {{main article|Domestic duck}} link at the top of the section, per WP:MOS. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

What I mean by "trivia" is "unrelated to the topic of this article". That a ship happened to be given the name of this duck tells us exactly nothing about the duck – the only connection is that they have the same name. A lot of people have been named Albert, but we don't need to list them in our page on Einstein.

What I mean by random is something like "made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision" (Oxford American Dictionary). Why mention four UK warships but not two American ones, or the railway engine? If that didn't come about by chance, what rational criterion of selection was applied? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

In those two relevant cases, simple forgetfulness must be the reason, as they both justify a brief mention, and help to make the point that the mallard continues to be important in culture. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

One other thing: it will be difficult for uninvolved editors to see what we are discussing given that you have deleted a large chunk of it without consensus. I suggest we put it back, without prejudice, so that everyone can see the situation and decide what to do on the basis of the evidence. My proposal, given the above agreement about the species, is to provide a brief (one paragraph) section, with a "main" link to Domestic duck, summarizing the role of the "Domestic duck in culture". The rest of the material directly on Mallard of course belongs here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:47, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

• I think that given there's a domestic duck page that this page would be better focused on the importance of the species in culture of wild mallards (while obviously noting that they are domesticated!). Sabine's Sunbird talk 09:05, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I've copied (with attribution) the 'domestic' parts of the Culture section from here, and suggest we just leave a "main" link and brief summary of the domestic duck article behind. Much of the Culture material (hunting, still lifes, ...) however applies unequivocally to mallard not to domestic duck. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Photo captions

I've changed the wording on one of the pictures from "fledgling" to "juvenile", as this bird clearly has no flight feathers (meaning it hasn't yet fledged). I also have issue with the photo currently also labeled "juvenile" that shows two supposedly female juveniles in Paris. For one thing, the closer bird is a male, not a female (as indicated in the picture's description) – a female would have an orange bill with a black saddle, not a yellow-green bill. And I'm not convinced these aren't just adults in eclipse plumage; none of the critical features for distinguishing immature birds from adults (i.e. flank feathers) are visible here. MeegsC (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Pre-FA

It would be great if we could get this article to an FA level. It looks like a very important article to me, so we could improve any issues present in the article, it would help the article reach an FA level. So, do you feel there are any issues with the article (would be better to improve them before going to the next stage)? Never been through an FA before, so posting it in the talk page, just like the FA-page says. @Chiswick Chap: @Casliber: @Justlettersandnumbers: Adityavagarwal (talk) 13:47, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

• I have a problem with the statement the New Zealand grey duck population declined drastically due to overhunting in the mid-20th century.. Not that it isn't true, it is, but the sentence seems to be suggesting that that, not being outcompeted and hybridised by mallards, are the reason for the species decline and soon to be extinction in NZ, which is not supported by the linked to article. Sabine's Sunbird talk 20:28, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much, buddy. I think it is resolved now. Could you have a look at it? Thanks again! Adityavagarwal (talk) 21:00, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

videos

Mallard duckling preening

Female mallard and ducklings preening

As this is already a GA with lots of media, I'll just drop these videos here and defer to other editors to decide whether/where to include. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:01, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• A mallard looking duck.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

What characteristic colours?

"During the final period of maturity leading up to adulthood (6–10 months of age), the plumage of female juveniles remains the same while the plumage of male juveniles gradually changes to its characteristic colours."

What are the 'characteristic colors'? 162.199.148.71 (talk) 05:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Washington University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Fall term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)