Talk:Crow

Thievery

http://img210.imageshack.us/my.php?image=n74642016015114085152so3.jpg That crow threw a pack of cheetos from the stand, ate one then opened another package and ate all of it, they do have a thing for cheese :P I don't know if it would be a contrubiton the article but I guess people interested in Crows might find that one interesting. I don't have acess to original file right now (took it last year should be in one of the backup discs), but I think I have the .raw of that photo or at least higher resolution somewhere. I'll check back this talk page sometime later this week, so drop a note if you want it for wikipedia. 85.108.109.30 (talk) 01:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments without headings

"Crows have been noted to have some type of funeral, and ravens often score very highly on intelligence tests."

Does the word "funeral" in this sentence have some meaning I'm not familiar with, or is this just a typo? --Camipco 23:09, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Please don't top-post. No it's not a typo, and it doesn't have a meaning you're not familiar with. Many species of Crow have very specific, ritualistic behaviors associated with the death of one of their own, which vary from group to group.

In my area, they mourn the dead of one killed prematurely for a period of about 2 weeks, during which their vocalizations, flight patterns, and social organizations differ noticeably from the norm; when an "elder" dies of old age, there is no such mourning. Though admittedly speculative on my part, this says to me that they not only have a very clear concept of death, but seem to have some sort of "belief" concerning when death is "right", or natural, and when it is "wrong", or unnatural. It's a shame no ornithologists have published anything on this (probably for fear of being laughed out of the profession), or else I'd be inclined to include it in the article. --Corvun 23:29, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about the top post. Perhaps something like "Crows have been noted to mourn their dead, and ravens ..." would be clearer? Given how dramatically wrong old assumptions about bird intelligence have been shown to be in just the last decade, I wouldn't be surprised to see serious research showing evidence of your speculation not too far in the future.--Camipco 19:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

It's hard to say which would be clearer. In a technical sense, any kind of death ritual (that is, behavior associated exclusively or near-eclusively with death) would qualify as a funeral, although not necessarily the sort of funeral that the modern western mind is used to seeing. The modern western funeral, after all, has been influenced by generation after generation of changing beliefs, folklore, and superstition unique to itself. The death rituals (funerals) of other cultures, or other species, would not necessarily be expected to have much in common with modern western tradition. I personally think that the phrase "some kind of funeral" adequately expresses the fact what they have isn't what the reader has become familiar with as far as formal custom is concerned, but an activity serving basically the same function.

One possible solution might be to link the phrase "mourn their dead" thusly. But I'd wait to see what the other contributors think before making such a change. --Corvun 23:20, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Why did the mention of the "funeral" disappear from the page? I think this should be added back, if we can find some sort of reference for it. I'm sure it's got to have been documented in the scientific literature. I'll add it back if I can find a reference for it, but...why did it disappear? Cazort 00:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I belive the name for this family is not Crow, but Crows. Crow is a species?Dan Koehl 09:58 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

---

Jim, this page is going to get really long if we mention all 100-odd species! And then there are the close allies (which some authorities classify as part of the Corvidae - notably Sibley & Alquist) - woodswallows, butcherbirds, Australian magpies, currawongs, birds of paradise, mud nest builders .... !

Also, some notes on the origin of the family and the relationships between them are appropriate. I'll do an entry on the Australian ones shortly, but (at this stage) I intend to do a single article to cover the six species - better one good article than five stubs - and in the case of these six, they will go well in a single entry. But if this is going to mess you up, sing out! (Regard my additions to the listing just now as temporary, in other words, to be moved elsewhere if it seems appropriate.) Tannin 00:22 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)

---

Tannin sounds good to me. I'm splitting articles as I go along as well.jimfbleak 07:12 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)

---

Dan Bird families are often described as singular. Although Crow is often used in common parlance for a species, all forms have a more correct name, such as carrion crow or American crow.jimfbleak 07:12 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)

---

Nice solution, Tannin. I'll adopt this and make the redirects as I go along. jimfbleak 11:44 Apr 17, 2003 (UTC)

---

I've made this even more precise, and it now refers only to the species that are called crows in English, since we also have an article on the genus Corvus. - Montréalais

---

so why does crow crow? shouldn't the article explain a bit about their behavior? food? etc? Xah P0lyglut 02:56, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)

---

I thought the evidence suggests that Corvids evolved in Australasian region and radiated outward. Barker (2004) - abstract here: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0401892101v1 - suggests that in fact all Passerines evolved in the Australasian region and radiated outward. In fact Barker is quoted “There are many endemic Corvida birds on the Indonesian island of Lombok but very few on Bali, the next island to the west ... sure enough, the line separating the Asian plate from the Australasian plate runs between Bali and Lombok." ERicson suggests a Gondwanaland origin of the Passerines: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1034/j.1600-048X.2003.03121.x/full/ and says some interesting things about the corvids also. Scot Mcphee 20 Oct 200417:50 (AEST).

---

I changed the Crow page into a disambugation page, and moved the original article to this page.

---

Could we have a proper picture? The painting is very nice and all but it would be good to have a real photo too. Agentsoo 9 July 2005 11:40 (UTC)

---

Spelling

It's nitpicky, but are we concerned about simple spelling and grammer issues? For instance, you "insure" your car against damage, but you must "ensure" that nothing happens to it. When referencing the crow's feeding on the poisonous toads the beaks "ensure" the innards can be reached. But that's awkardly worded anyway. Maybe that can be fixed as well...--APZachariah (talk) 13:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Lifetime of a Crow - Missing

I was trying to find the lifetime (in years) of a crow, but couldn't find it in this article. This info needs to be added. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.191.21.204 (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC).

Yup I came here searching the same information... --213.22.5.71 (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Here...

"In captivity, both crows and ravens have been known to live for about thirty years - tops. In the wild, the average life span of a crow is 7-8 years." from http://web.archive.org/web/20060328222401/http://www.ascaronline.org/crowfaq.html --213.22.5.71 (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Raven vs. Crow

Someone who's an expert on this should consider combining the Raven article with the Crow article, which both look to be quite similar and have a lot of overlap. Or that someone should explain what the difference is and why the pages are separate.

The explanation of that is in the article. Quote: "Raven is the common name given to several large black birds of the genus Corvus. Other birds in the same genus are the smaller crows, jackdaws, and rooks." Or: Raven = large Corvus, Crow = small corvus 88.73.5.50 23:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm no expert, but I was just comparing the two pages. It appears both the raven and crow are members of the same genus, but where they separate from there depends on individual specie physical characteristics. Primarily, ravens are larger than crows. There are some behavioral differences between the two, but that does not affect their taxinomical classification. Katzen 23:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

As a birder, I can explain a bit. The terms "raven" and "crow" are layman's terms for different sizes of related birds. Yes, ravens and crows are members of the same genus but they are not the same species. There are many species of ravens and many species of crows. Perhaps the basic "These are the species" pages for both ravens and crows could go on the "Corvus" page (which shouldn't re-direct to "Crow" anyhow because it includes Ravens! It should stay as "Corvus" with "Crow" re-directing to it!). So, yes, the Raven article could be mostly moved to a page on the Corvus genus. A more useful re-direct from "Raven" would be to "Common Raven" (the most, well, common raven species and what is usually meant by saying "raven" off-hand); with, of course, a nice link to the Corvus article for other raven species. Nixve (talk) 05:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nixve, Corvus shouldn't redirect to Crow, the Crow and Raven article should be combined into a Corvus page, and redirect to it with species pages branching off of it. Plcoffey (talk) 23:15, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Another voice here to say that the two birds are different. In the past five minutes, I've come across two that stated such: Birds of Nova Scotia: Common Raven, (removed second reference as Suite101 is "blacklisted" by WikiPedia). Came to Wikipedia for more info only to find a bit of confusion here! While I am here: it would be interesting to confirm how easy it is to buy one of these in Canada (apparently, it's illegal to purchase one in America). Thanks! Maltiti2005 (talk) 03:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Crow accounts for the entire family whereas Raven is a particular species. I don't see why you would put the two into one article, none of the other animal articles are organized in this fashion. See http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-a-raven-and-a-crow.htm for more details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.75.158.180 (talk) 21:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The family is corvidae it includes crows, ravens and jays. The genus is corvus that's what we're discussing here. A quick reference to a published encyclopedia (I know I can't cite it) makes a distinction between crows and ravens as sub-groups of the genus. user:Nixve and user:plcoffey seem to me to have a concensus here. Which one of you would like to do the rewrites?Mstuczynski (talk) 00:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Please, no, do not merge Raven into Crow. I like the suggestions put forward by Nixve and Plcoffey. I am a birder and use Wikipedia (among other resources) to look up accounts of birds. Ravens and crows are distinctly different groups with species under each. A crow is not a raven, a raven is not a crow. If the quote sited above "Raven is the common name given to several large black birds of the genus Corvus. Other birds in the same genus are the smaller crows, jackdaws, and rooks." is confusing to those unfamiliar with these birds, perhaps it can be clarified. I am too close to this so I don't see the reason for confusion and have no suggested clarification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kperegrine (talk • contribs) 15:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd suggest merging Raven and Raven (disambiguation) instead, since the current Raven page is just a group of links, better handled by a disambiguation page. Narayanese (talk) 14:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Burton Two (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)==Crow Hunting==

Are there any states in the US anybody knows of that it is illegal to hunt crows? RHW/Femur corrected the federal guidelines for hunting crows that are predating or posing a health hazard. Could the UK and Australian codes be referenced by EU wikians?

There is a citation requested in the section on hunting in relation to the law in Australia- i don't know how to insert citations, but if anyone would like to, each state in Australia has mirrored legislation protecting all native fauna, with a number of exceptions. It would be legal to cull native birds in some areas of NSW if the were agricultural pests. The example legistlation would be the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Act http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/npawa1974247/ there would be similar provision for all six states, and Commonwealth legislation which provides for similar protection in the two federal territories.

Well, if hunting crows is legal in at least one state, what state might that be? Is the Federal regulation meant to prohibit unlawful trafficking in stuffed ravens, or crows? How then do museums obtain stuffed ravens or crows if trafficking is unlawful? I think the main article could be improved if there were a link to taxidermists who are qualified or licensed to sell stuffed crows, however they came by them. 198.177.27.24 (talk) 04:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Washington state (U.S.) fish and game regulations: per official state web site, crows are classed with upland game birds and may be hunted from Oct 01 through Jan 31, except that birds "depradating" may be destroyed at any time. A small game hunting license is required (US$ 32.85 per year for residents). There is no 'bag' limit, so any number may be taken per day. The 60 year old American Crow Hunters Association holds an annual crow hunt and crow calling contest each June. Ravens are protected by state and federal law and may not be hunted at any time. As to why one would hunt crow, several web sites offer recipes for both whole-bird and breast- meat-only preparations. Most breast meat recipes suggest four to six breasts (two or three birds) per adult serving. Bon appetit. Burton Two (talk) 21:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC) 17 Dec 2008

Trivia Section replaced with Crows in Heraldry

RHW/Femur fixed Trivia section, now the Crows in Heraldry section.

Picture = not so good?

I hope this doesn't disrupt any ongoing crazy theological argument... but I must say-- we can do better than the current crow pic, right? How about a nice, hi-res photo? I might have one or two available... but would rather give a resident wiki-head the chance to find something first. Consider it a heartfelt request from an honest, regular *reader* of the 'pedia. This is a major article on a very notable bird. As such, a passable, mediocre illustration just doesn't cut the mustard. I beg that YOU find a pic worthy of this important article! I know you all are up to it-- make me proud! (wipes tear from cheek) 66.222.50.71 05:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

---

"Crows have been noted to have some type of funeral, and ravens often score very highly on intelligence tests.

Does the word "funeral" in this sentence|Dan Koehl]] 09:58 Dec 18, 2002 (UTC)

Dan Bird families are often described as singular. Although Crow is often used in common parlance for a species, all forms have a more correct name, such as carrion crow or American crow.jimfbleak 07:12 Mar 15, 2003 (UTC)

---

is quoted “There are many endemic Corvida birds on the Indonesian island of Lombok but very few on Bali, the next island to the west ... sure enough, the line separating the Asian plate from the Australasian plate runs between Bali and Lombok." ERicson suggests a Gondwanaland origin of the Passerines: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1034/j.1600-048X.2003.03121.x/full/ and says some interesting things about the corvids also. Scot Mcphee 20 Oct 200417:50 (AEST).

---

I changed the Crow page into a I felt this was both fair and NPoV as it does not form an opinion on either work (like one being inspired from the other) but rather says that they where inspired from the same origin which is vague enough to mean anything the user reading wants it to mean. Likewise I am unsure of your reason for reverting my edit... was my revised changed incorrect, of biased point of view or offensive? I look forward to your reply on this matter. --Zikar 13:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

"A few billion others" is a grave overstatement. It's doubtful that there's even one billion people in the world who believe that the events in Genesis actually occured, especially when you consider that creationism (the belief in the literal, rather than spiritual or allegorical truthfulness ofso of Genesis had evolved from some form of Chaldean mythology, if not specifically Sumerian mythology. --Corvun 22:28, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

knowledge of history and science makes a literal interpretation of the Genesis stories unfeasible and at odds with the well-known and established history of the planet Earth; which is why only creationists, a small and mostly American subset of fundamentalist Abrahamic religion limited almost entirely to the charismatic and evangelical branches of Protestant Christianity, still hold such views.  I intend no disrespect, but going around censoring Wikipedia to keep from offending any possible members of a fringe belief isn't what NPOV is about.  It's not NPOV to alter references of Chaldean mythology to be less offensive to you and what you believe your religion has to say about history; just like you don't see me altering pages that mention Proto-Indo-European religion to make them friendlier to my religion's claims about history, for exactly that reason. --Corvun 07:00, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

, we have chosen, chosen to believe certain things that aren't supported by historical evidence. We've done this as a matter of faith, which I'm sure you'll agree is a very important thing to have. But as much as we edit can surly allow both ‘’our’’ parties to be happy, unless you specifically wish to discredit the bible. I haven’t checked the page on Noah’s Arc. However, if that article is to be NPoV then it would have to supply and comment on both criticisms and support for Noah being fact or fiction showing both side fairly letting the reader decide for themselves. Being that this is a completely unrelated article I feel it should support neither view but instead point to articles where readers can make up their own minds.

Finally… Please just answer me these questions, don’t go any deeper than the words used.

Do my edits detract from this article about Crows?

Do my edits contain incorrect or bias UTC)

I’m not offended, I just felt like you where avoiding the point. Now where are getting somewhere.

I’m afraid to suggest that Noah’s Arc was inspired by Gilgamesh is a CPoV as you put it… there is no evidence to suggest that Noah’s Arc was inspired by Gilgamesh except for the similarities in content other than the fact that Gilgamesh was written before, although, this would be expected since Genesis was written centauries after the fact through a man by God… since this cannot be disproved any more than it can be proved, a NPoV would stand in the middle ground supporting or criticising neither idea. Since you seem I didn’t feel like being subtle as you obviously have your own point of view that belief in the bible is limited to a few thousand people and that it is not fact and thus should always be represented as such… obviously the only way to reach any sort of agreement is to remove people will listen, and are willing to resort to intentional dishonesty and (poor) attempts at deceit to do so. I find it inconceivable that you would actually believe that "billions of people" believe in exactly the same things you do just because you belong to some tiny little sect of a much larger religion, and am now, by your latest statements, forced to believe go about it. --Corvun 07:13, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

I tried to reason with you... My edits ARE of neutral point of view... denying that means you either fail to understand English or are just someone who is trolling and wishes to add as many anti-bible statements as possible to post to try and spread your personal view of the universe. I'm fed up of this pathetic and pointless argument with someone who cares more about their own pride, personal opinion and hatred for the bible rather than the integrity, logic and NPoV of this article. I am totally dumbfounded as to how you can believe my edits are anything other than to keep it NPoV. I've tried to remain civil, calm and logical but unfortunately it seems that you cannot understand logic beyond “It's not what I've written therefore it must be bad”. As for saying I'm trying to gave yourself away. Ha, ha, very funny. I'm not going to let you keep baiting me. I know you're just trying to start trouble. I'm not falling for it again. --Corvun 10:31, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

information request:

getting back to a previously mentioned idea: what exactly would a crow "funeral" consist of? if the rites differ from group to group, is there a general "shape" to a crow funeral/mourning patterns? what kinds of things could one expect a crow to do after discovering the death of another crow in its social group? does the pattern differ when mourning a mate?

i am also curious to know more about these kinds of social groupings -- what IS a crow social group, how does it function, how large might it be, etc. i understand this will differ species to species, but are there some general observations that can be made?

- jonathan ball, 5 nov 2005

The part about Neopagan beliefs regarding crows being black is idiotic, especially given the fact that not all crows are all-black, and American crows, which appear black, are actually dark brown, and ravens have a dark blue sheen to them. Peasily 10:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Corvus americanus?

I grew up hearing the name Corvus americanus for the American Crow; Audubon, for example, used this name. [1]
Anyone know if this was formerly the name of Corvus brachyrhynchos; if it referred to a different (or multiple) species; or if the name was never an official name for any species? In any of these cases it seems a note in the article (something along the lines of "syn/formerly C. americanus") would be helpful, but I'll leave that to those more knowledgable in this area. - Severinus 21:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

calls section

I think a big project would be to take out some of the books listed on the crows.net bibliography and provide specific references for a lot of these assertions (and others in other sections on the site). I think we really do need a section on the vocalizations though...it's one of the most interesting (and prominent) aspects of crows. So...please do look over what I wrote, feel free to butcher it if need be, although I think we definitely need to have more discussion of the sounds that crows make (the word caw wasn't even mentioned on the page!). Cazort 00:41, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Half Life2?

How does this get a mention when it is not even referring to crows but ravens? I think it should be deleted and/or replaced with a reference to the movie The Crow which would portray a better example of crows as a positive in media.

Age

What is their average life expectancy? should that perhaps be added?

Diet?

What do crows eat? (seeds, insects, road kill?) RJFJR 14:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Crows will mostly certainly eat road kill,as most drivers have observed. They have been know to eat virtually anything that humans eat.If they can be coaxed to come and eat from an observable spot the entertainment they provide is truly limitless. This may take some time however, as crows are very wary. If you are trying to lure them in to eat, winter may be the best time because food is not as plentiful, and they are more likely to give in to hunger. As far as their diet in the wild, they are fond of easy meals such as other bird's eggs and baby birds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.149.236 (talk • contribs)

Native American Mythology

The paragraph under "Mythology and Folklore" about Native American mythology is misleading and possibly incorrect. It asserts that corvidae are sinister and negative animals in this culture's folklore. While the figure Kwakwakalanooksiwae is indeed a cannibalistic villain, the portrait of crows and ravens is often benign. The more common Raven is alternatively portrayed as a creator-god, a fertility god, a Promethean saviour, and a comical trickster. While Raven's motive is often mischievious, the result is usually benficient to humans. I will not, however, change the paragraph unless more in the community agree with the modification. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Squids We B (talk • contribs) 18:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

---

"In Native American folklore, Crow is often seen as a similar trickster to Coyote. However, Crow's tricks tend to be more out of malice and they rarely (if ever) are portrayed as a hero. One possible explanation for this is that crows are often considered a pest to crops, which the tribes who came up with the stories featuring Crow needed to survive."

I removed this paragraph. There is no source of where this information comes from. It is also incorrect to state that all Indigenous people share the same belief regarding crows. Anthropologists would be more specific.

-Bill Apr 9, 2007

Scavengers

Is it alright to call some crow species as scavengers? __earth ^(Talk) 14:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I have problems with the statement "In modern films such as Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, The Omen II and Exorcist: The Beginning, crows are shown tearing out people's eyes while they are still alive. This, of course, does not happen as crows can distinguish between carrion and living people." while crows can of course distinguish between carrion and living people, American Crows have been shown to attack and eat from living livestock (Kilham, 1989) and i see no evidence that they would not do the same to a weak or young human. I suggest revision. --Plcoffey 23:23, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyone have a problem with me changing this?--Plcoffey 00:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Lack of Sources

This section regarding the topic of crows seems to be severely lacking in sources of info. Footnotes and bibliography is needed.

Bill- Apr 9, 2007

Vandalism

The Wikipedian community should be aware that this article has been targeted for vandalism. I've removed the "Crow Predation" section. Gimme danger 17:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Shiny

If I recall,crows have a thing for shine.Should there be a mention of this?User:Serprex 20:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Unsure

are there copyright issues squidoo.com/crow1/ here? MarkDilley —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 01:48, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Raven/Crow again

These two articles are very similar, and I'm seeing parts of the Crow article that could very well be part of the Raven article, such as that on Hugin and Munin. I propose redefining "crows" in this article to be small corvids, since the "ravens" are defined to be large corvids. What does everyone else think? Depending on whether or not there are negative responses, I will start work on splitting the two articles soon if there are no objections. Cheers, Corvus coronoides _talk 01:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Better still both should be small sub-articles of the major article Corvidae. Guy (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

No merger

They shouldn't be merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.247.165.195 (talk) 18:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I would like to know that wether crow has two eyes or not.In my childhood i was told that crow only one eye,And i could"nt find any material to read and confirm.Pls let us —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.92.151 (talk) 10:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Raven is not a Crow

A Raven is not a crow so why shou you merge the two articles. They are different birds and the only reason that people get them confused is because they look similar! I think that you should not merge the two pages. 71.121.206.145 (talk) 00:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)Mouse

Indeed, they are different animals so merging the articles don't make sense.

/ Mats Halldin (talk) 08:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Erm, some ravens are large and some crows are small. The validity of the epithets is questionable. 3 well known speices in Australia are all more closely related to the 2 species called Crows in Australia..I'd make them small but keep them as good placeds to fork off to cultural sections as well as individual species called Crows and Ravens, with the genus corvus about the whole lot. I suppose that makes me a weak oppose but would help out if we merged. No biggie reallycheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that the "Lories and lorikeets" page works because there is no common one name for loriinae. I think that corvus may not a good name for a merged page, because it is not a common word. I have not made up my mind on this merge. On a crows and ravens page, where would jackdaws and magpies go? Snowman (talk) 12:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Indeed, they are different animals" - if you take into account ALL ravens and ALL crows, you'll see that they are not. Consider Dwarf Raven, White-necked Raven, Torresian Crow, Piping Crow.

And still: every single place on Earth probably has their specific "ravens" and "crows" and at least rural dwellers probably will be able to tell these apart. But considered globally it is impossible to draw a dividing line. So I agree with Casliber - biologically they are one and the same; crows and ravens vary more among themselves than they differ among each other. Culturally they are 2 kinds. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 04:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

What kind of a standard are you applying? Is there an objective standard that can be applied, such as that offered by DNA analysis? When is a raven a raven, and when is a crow a crow, and when can they be crossed? If they are capable of interbreeding, then they are not separate species!198.177.27.24 (talk) 04:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Raven is not a Crow like a Leopard is not a Cheetah

I totally agree that the two articles should not be merged. To say that a Raven is a Crow is like saying that a wolf and a Silver Fox are the same. On thing that could be done though, is that the two articles could be divided up more. The sections in the crow article which talk about Ravens, for example in mythology, could be transfered to the Raven article and the Crow article could focus more on this one genus. Because Crows and Ravens have such a long history in mythology and European folklore perhaps a seperate Wikipedia section should be made called "Corvus" under which the discussion of the genus and the ways the two species differ not, and, maintain the two articles on "Crows" and "Ravens" but use them to discuss the cultural, historical and mythological symbolism of the two animals. If a link to "Corvus" is supplied in each entry then the information should be more fucused and complete. PhilipGHunt (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, now that you mention it, leopards can be crossed with cheetahs. Does that mean that ravens can be crossed with crows? What the main article needs, is a classification underpinned by modern, state of the art DNA analysis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.177.27.24 (talk) 04:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

2.6MB animated gif in "See also"

This image is awfully large and doesn't seem to be referred to in the body text of the article. It'll swamp the connections of dialup and mobile users. Should it be removed, linked to instead of embedded, or otherwise changed somehow? I'm surprised to see it's already been here for a whole month. 66.11.117.140 20:19, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Crow vs. Raven

I came here because I wanted to know how to tell the difference between a crow and a raven when only one or the other is present. On the article for Raven it is clear that a crow is not a raven, but when I clicked on the link for Crow from the Raven article it brought me to an article that seems to be about the entire genus, not one species. Further it completely veers from no difference between a crow and a raven to ravens being a species of crow to all crows being ravens. It is very confused and makes one wonder if any of you guys know what you are talking about. Whatever is written here it completely contradicts what was stated in the Raven article and everything that I had been taught. It would seem the first person that brought this up was on the correct track, there is the genus, Crow then the species which are either crows or ravens.

Here’s what the Encyclopedia Britanica has to say: [blanked]

Rod Lockwood (talk) 00:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you're looking for American Crow, which is "the crow" in the US. The trouble is that, worldwide, "crow" is the name of a family of birds that includes the Raven. -- Mwanner | Talk 00:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Shani planet.jpg

The image Image:Shani planet.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Pronounciation?

Could someone add some IPA to clarify the pronounciation? Is it crow rhyming with Homer Simpson's d'oh or is it crow rhyming with cow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.138.194.235 (talk) 19:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

How many eyes crow have

Hi my name is Vikas Chopkar and i am from india. I heard from someone that Crow have only one eye and he can rotate the eye internally to see from both side is it true.