Talk:Song Thrush

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Featured article star Song Thrush 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.
WikiProject Birds
Birds Portal
Song Thrush is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Birds To-do:
Song Thrush is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.

Contents

[edit] Lower case

There is only one species with the correct name Blackbird. if you change to lower case, it invites confusion with other species such as Red-winged Blackbird, which isn't even a thrush. However, I've added the scientific name to remove any possible ambiguity (probably should have done that anyway)

jimfbleak 12:54 4 Jun 2003 (UTC)

[edit] Throstle

A song thrush may also be known as a throstle. (Source: Wiktionary entry for throstle) Not sure if I should reference the Wiktionary entry in the Wikipedia article? Jameboy 22:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not suitable as a reference. Richard001 02:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Range map

The map key contains the yellow and blue ranges, but not the green area. Snowman (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] In culture section

I wonder if it isn't better to remove this whole section, especially the random collection of appearances in poetry seem low on notability. Narayanese (talk) 22:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, I'll wait and see what happens at GA review though. Jimfbleak (talk) 05:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

  • The link to sedentary (a redirect to sedentary lifestyle) doesn't really clarify this usage of the term to me.
  • "On average, 54.6% of juveniles survive the first year of life, and the adult annual survival rate is 62.2%." - no citation and no explanation of where in its range this was measured or when. Suggest something like "A survey in England in 2006 found that..."
Tim, citation 3 at the end of the next sentence covers it. It isn't clear how the figures were derived on that page. Do you think the inline citation should be placed at the end of both consecutive sentences?cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
  • "eating a wide range of invertebrates, especially earthworms, snails, soft fruit and berries." - berries and fruit are not invertebrates.
reworded to "eating a wide range of invertebrates, especially earthworms and snails, as well as soft fruit and berries" to clarify. Could stick the last two at the front but felt invertebrates better at front.cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor quibbles, otherwise excellent. On hold for now. I'll leave this open for a while, since the nominator said they would be away until the 26th of Feb. Drop me a note on my talk page when you're done. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:08, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks fine now. Congratulations! Tim Vickers (talk) 16:48, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aviculture

The article mentions one caged thrush in a pub, which would be subject to regulations these days. Does this practice need to be explained more? Are their threats of this practice to song birds and the Song Thrush in some parts of the world, past and present? (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] China

There is undue weightage on the ban in China and about some report on the web with notes on the errors in it - with a newspaper link that does not work. Is this really so important? Shyamal (talk) 03:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The whole story from China has me very confused. The Times article names the songbird in question as the Hwamei, which is not the species described in this article. Meanwhile this article indicates that the law in question applies only to Beijing and not to the whole country. Can anyone get to the bottom of what's going on? Recruiting a Chinese-speaking Wikipedian may be of some help, as English-language sources seem to be lacking. Kla’quot (talk | contribs) 03:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)