Talk:Bird of prey: Difference between revisions
10014derek (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 85: | Line 85: | ||
*'''Oppose:''' There are other birds of prey other than hawks. Bird of prey refers to a wide variety. <big><span style="font-family: Century Gothic">[[User:Swannie|<span style="color:blue">'''swannie'''</span>]][[User talk:Swannie|<span style="color:green">'''talk'''</span>]]</span></big> 02:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Oppose:''' There are other birds of prey other than hawks. Bird of prey refers to a wide variety. <big><span style="font-family: Century Gothic">[[User:Swannie|<span style="color:blue">'''swannie'''</span>]][[User talk:Swannie|<span style="color:green">'''talk'''</span>]]</span></big> 02:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''Strong Oppose''' per article size after merge and all above. Stuff can still be added here. [[User:Sawblade05|<b><span style="color:yellow;background:black"> Sawblade05 </span></b>]] <sup>(</sup>[[User_talk:Sawblade05|<sup>talk to me</sup>]] <sup>|</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Sawblade05|<sup>my wiki life</sup>]]<sup>)</sup> 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Strong Oppose''' per article size after merge and all above. Stuff can still be added here. [[User:Sawblade05|<b><span style="color:yellow;background:black"> Sawblade05 </span></b>]] <sup>(</sup>[[User_talk:Sawblade05|<sup>talk to me</sup>]] <sup>|</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Sawblade05|<sup>my wiki life</sup>]]<sup>)</sup> 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC) |
||
* '''Strong Oppose:''' Hawks are part of birds of prey but Bird of Prey are not only about Hawks. Instead of merging the articles, I recommend improving the Hawk article instead. <span style="border: 1px solid">[[User:10014derek|'''<span style="background-color:White; color:#000000"> 10014derek </span>''']][[User talk:10014derek|<span style="background-color:#000000; color:Gold"> Ӂ </span>]]</span> 14:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:01, 2 September 2008
Software: Computing Unassessed | |||||||||||||
|
Falcons
Needs to be merged with Raptor Mintguy 16:38 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- I'm currently working on completing those bird families still without articles, while Tannin sorts out the existing articles for a consistent layout, so in the fullness of time, it will be done. jimfbleak 05:53 10 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I'm leary of the statement that no falcons build nests. The recent uproar over the eviction of "Pale Male" in NYC seems like a counter-example. Perhaps Pale Male is not a falcon???
- This Pale Man bit is meaningless to me, as a Brit, so can't help with that. Falcons need somewhere to nest, be it on a cliff, a ledge on a building, or an old crow's nest, so they can still be rendered homeless. That's not the same as building a nest. jimfbleak 17:58, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Not all hawks belong to the genera Accipiter
Maybe we should change the line:
Hawks are medium-sized birds of prey that belong to the genera Accipiter. They are mainly woodland birds that hunt by sudden dashes from a concealed perch. They usually have long tails and high visual acuity.
to read most hawks belong to the genera Accipiter.
(see red-tail hawk for an example)
- Corrected. Dysmorodrepanis 06:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Owls
"Nocturnal birds of prey—the owls—are separate from the diurnal families, and are in the order Strigiformes. Although the term "raptor" is sometimes used more broadly, in general it includes owls."
Does or doesn't? --Sambostock 11:23, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
- my personal (but i think informed) opinion is that "raptor" (literally: plunderer or robber) and "bird of prey" (lit. a predatory bird) are general terms that are meant to capture a 'family resemblance' (in a Wittgensteinian sense); they share
similarbroadly similar lifestyles, and so as result of similar selection pressures share particular adaptations). for instance, we in the western hemisphere picture a member of the Cathartidae when we see vultures circling; and tho these birds have excellent vision, prey mostly (but not exclusively!) on animal flesh, and are masterful fliers, they may in fact be closer relatives of the storks than of falconiform birds like kestrels, eagles, or even gryphon vultures. the owls may or may not be related to the falconiforms, but they share their taste for flesh and the equipment for capturing it: sharp beak and grasping talons, superior senses and powerful flight. but depending upon the degree of specialization or generalization in day/night activity, acuity and even degree of color vision may vary from genus to genus. and though there are exceptions, most owls are ambush predators, dashing silently from out of view to capture prey, and so are relatively slow fliers with great control. most birds are visually sensitive to movement, and these are no exceptions. however, as most if not all information in this article will be redundant, i suggest that Bird of prey should be turned into a Disambig page with links to Falconiformes, Strigiformes, and Cathartidae. - Metanoid (talk, email) 04:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
PBS Nature Special, and technical facts
PBS has a new episode of Nature about raptors, lots of cool facts about their anatomy and skills.
One neat thing they mention is that many dive hunters have a peak vision angle ~45deg off of centerline, and dive in a spiral to keep an eye on prey. Nature states that the indirect flight path is to avoid the drag of cocking the head to one side to watch the target. What I think is actually happening there is that the stereo vision is useless for common ranges; the raptor instead spirals to sweep it's view back-and-forth. By comparing how much the prey appears to move against the backdrop, the predator should gauge very useful range information. It's just like how astronomers use the Earth's orbit to range out a distant galaxy; the wider a range of views used, the better.
68.0.226.163 04:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- I think there are a fair number of papers on raptor vision; it's an interesting subject. You might want to check up on Google Scholar. Dysmorodrepanis 06:17, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- 68.0.226.163 - Thanks for the google scholar pointer, I found interesting info there, but not the answer. There were 3 ok hits; a 2000 article by VA Tucker in the Journal of Experimental Biology, a 2004 by IR Schwab in Br. J. Opthalamol, and a meaty 1971 paper from George E Goslow Jr. (though I've only had the time to skim it so far). The 2000 article only mentions the drag issue, and skirts the "why" of the fovea design in the first place. The '04 only quotes the '00 article on the issue. I'll e-mail what authors I can find about this; this feels like one of those little discoveries where the existing research just needed to be phrased and rearranged to put two and two together.
Religion and Birds of Prey
Previously I added some information regarding the spiritual and religious aspects of birds of prey amongst many Native American tribes in North America. This information was removed and the person removing them deemed the inclusion of this information "parochial." Many birds of prey are viewed as religious or spiritual objects to numerous tribes and tribal members in the U.S. This is not a parochial argument but a matter of fact. For references supporting this, see, for example, these government sources:
Clinton, William J. Executive Memorandum: “Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathers for Native American Religious.” 59 F.R. 22953 (1994). Retrieved December 10, 2007 (http://www.animallaw.info/administrative/adus59fr22953.htm)
Saenz v. Department of Interior, D.C. No. 99-21-M (2001). Retrieved December 10, 2007 (http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2001/08/00-2166.htm)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001. “Native American Activities: Migratory Bird Feathers.” Retrieved November 21, 2007 (http://library.fws.gov/Pubs2/nativeamerican01.pdf)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. “Eagle Parts for Native American Religious Purposes Permit Application and Shipping Request.” Retrieved August 6, 2006 (http://www.fws.gov/permits/forms/eaglereligious.pdf).
These referenes are not presented so as to suggest that every tribe necessarily believes every bird of prey is religious or spiritual in nature or that tribal members "worship" birds of prey. None of these are the case. Instead, as was attempted to be shown, many birds of prey have a religious or spiritual use, meaning or import to many tribes and their members. Removing information demonstrating this religious and spiritual relationship between many Native American tribes and birds of prey (eagles, hawks, owls, etc.) is a disservice to wikipedia visitors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.203.230 (talk) 05:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Here's a nice picture
http://prime.lavalife.com/pictures/plus45/2008/03/24/15/1206385386636.jpeg
Can you tell me what kind of bird it is? The picture was taken in Mongolia, about an hour out into the steppes from Ulanbatar. And you can use the picture as an illustration of whatever kind of bird it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.5.68 (talk) 14:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
- Hard to tell, but you should check the local guides and see species that are confusable with the Steppe Eagle. Shyamal (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Article name/content agreement
There appears to be some work needed on this article. The lead is probably a bit too long, and could be broken up slightly, and even expanded, and the first line doesn't match the article title ("bird of prey" as of writing this). I tried to rewrite it, but I'm not sure I got it quite right. The problem is that Owls have their own article, and this one, which seems like it should cover all birds of prey, seems to have been written originally about raptors only (excluding owls, though I seem to recall often hearing Owls called "raptors" as well). The infobox certainly doesn't match the article title. I'm not quite sure how best to resolve all this. --Fru1tbat (talk) 18:29, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Merge proposal
the entry hawk isn't dong very much in and of itself. what say we make it a section in this entry, a related term? - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 06:55, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
see also Talk:WikiProject_Birds#Merge_proposal. - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 07:23, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - There is a lot more which could be added to the entry 'hawk', including etymology and regional variations eg. NW Hawk = OW buzzard etc. If we merge hawk, then eagle, kite, kestrel, vulture etc. should follow. However, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it if everyone else thought it a good idea. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose bird of prey can also include owls, eagles and other familes apart from being more of a literary term. Hawk is loose as well but a smaller category and it is fine as it stands like a disambiguation for taxonomic groups. Shyamal (talk) 07:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose nope, hawk does not cover all the same terms. Sabine's Sunbird talk 08:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose as per Shyamal and S's S jimfbleak (talk) 09:57, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- Weak support but good points all. i'm not stuck on the idea. - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 03:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- Weak oppose-I agree with Shaymal. Birds of Prey usually include the Owls, which clearly aren't Hawks. A better fit, I think, would be to merge Hawk into Accipitridae, but Accipitridae includes Eagles, Falcons and Kites, which also are not "hawks", but much closer in behavior and relationship. How do people feel about that merge?......Pvmoutside (talk) 19:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- i see Shyamal's and Casliber's points, but i think their concerns can by and large be addressed if Hawk were developed as a section of [Bird of prey]]. i realize that Bird of prey encompasses non-hawk-like species (owls, in particular); but there are certainly a very large number of birds of prey called hawks/buzzards, and i think there would be little confusion if readers were redirected to the (slightly) more inclusive article as i suggest... however, i also think that Pvmoutside's idea has some merit; Hawk as a section of Accipitridae? hmm. - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 19:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- In fits and starts I am developing Accipitridae and I would strongly object to that particular article having sections based on vague descriptors like "hawk" , "kite" or "eagle". I mention in the intro these names, and when the article is substantial it might be good to redirect some of these terms in this way, but a merge would make a for a really clumsy article. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- ach, well, i guess i can deal with that. again, i think that Bird of prey would be a good place to put such a broad, general entry as Hawk (as a section); but i will respect the consensus view. - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 20:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- Buzzard, too, could be easily adapted as a section of Bird of prey, as it is little more than a list.... - Μετανοιδ (talk, email) 22:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. Perhaps rather scrap the taxobox and make the article a prettied-up but straightforwaed disambiguation? (Bit more text, 4-picture gallery, as per grass frogs). Then, after Accipitridae is brought into better state, decide what to do with it. Arguably, folk taxonomy = form taxonomy, so people will go looking for info on "hawks". Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 04:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
- Oppose: There are other birds of prey other than hawks. Bird of prey refers to a wide variety. swannietalk 02:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose per article size after merge and all above. Stuff can still be added here. Sawblade05 (talk to me | my wiki life) 08:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose: Hawks are part of birds of prey but Bird of Prey are not only about Hawks. Instead of merging the articles, I recommend improving the Hawk article instead. 10014derek Ӂ 14:01, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Start-Class bird articles
- Top-importance bird articles
- WikiProject Birds articles
- Unassessed software articles
- Unknown-importance software articles
- Unassessed software articles of Unknown-importance
- Unassessed Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Software articles