Jump to content

Talk:Owl

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 173.2.184.63 (talk) at 23:47, 19 August 2009 (→POV Issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBirds B‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconOwl 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, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Birds To-do:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Snowy Owl vs. Northern Spotted Owl

Why would a Northern Spotted Owl, an admittedly rare species, be used as the main image for owls, when a snowy owl is more recognizable and accessible to the average reader? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.241.105 (talk) 03:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strigidae and Tytonidae

I think someone knowledgeable should write a paragraph on the differences (anatomical, behavioural etc.) between the Barn Owls and Typical Owls.

Intelligence?

Owls are often noted as smart animals (esp in pop culture.) Can anyone verify it?--sin-man 06:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, owls, although not quite the towers of intellect they are frequently portrayed as by the mass media, are apparently not stupid, either; wikipedia's article on Falconry has this to say:
"they [owls] are hearing- rather than sight-oriented ... This often leads falconers to believe that they are less intelligent ... However, if trained successfully, owls show intelligence on the same level as that of hawks and falcons."
Various books on owls (such as the generically-named "Encyclopedia of Owls", which is distinguished by the fact that photos depicting the author's children holding great-grey owls are included in it) also discuss the fact that owls are by no means less intelligent than other raptors; their sense are just optimized in different ways. 65.92.96.112 (talk) 01:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


i agree. and don't forget that a small brain doesn't limit intelligence. 76.102.94.69 (talk) 04:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

Please show me where it says that Bibilographies can not be in the main entry. I will certainly follow this suggestion if there is a consensus, but I feel that just as in printed encyclopedias, bibliographies or additional reading lists are helpful to the reader. --- Since writing this I have found this link Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources which says Biblios at end of article are good and that URLs should be visible for printing . -- Caltrop

  • "North American Owls: Biology and Natural History" by Paul A. Johnsgard, ISBN 1560987243, Smithsonian Institution Press, 1997

Anybody read the series "Guardians of Ga'Hoole?" Sasuke Uchica 17:19, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks, Vicki. I had a feeling that owls had some existence outside of the magical world of Harry Potter! -- User:Ed Poor

Here's a complete list of owl scientific names and groupings - maybe someone who knows about taxonomy can find the relevant bits for the article? I never studied biology! http://www.owlpages.com/species.php?genus=all

Shouldn't there be some link to O RLY? thing in here? It seems like a shallow and empty article without it.

O RLY is a website I believe not an actual owl. Personally I like the article.--Dakota ~ ° 20:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't believe I actually started this article 7 years ago. [1] But I had a feeling that if I wrote it that way, someone would quickly come along and improve it. --Uncle Ed (talk) 18:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source

My source for the range and the rewrite of direction-finding ears is, uh, whatever the heck the bird encyclopedia I have is called. I'll give details if anyone doesn't find that reference specific enough. --JerryFriedman 22:36, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Legislature?

Lilitu?

Should this read "Lilith" under Mythology? I hardly believe a metal band of little notoriety is the goddess the Iraqi region associated owls with.


Lilith/Lilitu, yes, is indeed (arguebly) assciated with screech owls. But it should be noted that she is in fact a demon NOT a Goddess. - Xuchilbara 18:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Xuchilbara[reply]

Vision

I've heard from several places that Owls are the only bird that can the colour blue. I'm not sure if this is accurate - it may just be an Urban myth. I have not added it as I can't verify it from a reputable source. Has anyone else heard this?? thanks Lucas42 19:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you forget about the BLUE BIRD? You know... that bird..

The entire section on digestion is copied from this article: http://www.owlpages.com/articles.php?section=Owl+Physiology&title=Digestion and needs to be re-written

I've removed the section - there's no point keeping such material in the article even with the notice. jimfbleak 12:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In reference to the following statement:

"Eagle Owls were seen as divine messengers of the gods while Barn or Horned owls were perceived as demonic figures."

I find this statement a little confusing because the Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) IS a "horned" owl insomuch as it has horns, or ear tufts as they're popularly called (although they're not really for hearing). If by "horned owl," the author means "great horned owl" of North America, it should probably be spelled out here. Also, the implication seems to be that specific groups of people distinguished between these two owls in this way (i.e., the one owl was considered divine by them while they considered the other to be demonic), whereas the two species are not found in the same continent so no one group would be in a position to compare the two species in this way (and even if they were, they would probably consider these similar-looking owls to be varying-sized individuals of one and the same species).


Just a thought.


Brian Quass

Size

The information on owl size in this article is quite misleading and incorrect. Actually the largest owl in the world is the Blakiston's Fish Owl (Bubo blakistoni). Though accurate data is hard to find for this rare species, it has a length of 60–72 cm (23½–28½ in), a weight of 3.2–4.6 kg (7 lb 1 oz–10 lb 2 oz) and a maximum wingspan of 180 cm (5 ft 11 in). The weight is likely for females alone (which are larger than males), as the range seems too narrow compared to the length range. Older reports of 80 cm (31½ in) length and 2 m (6½ ft) wingspans for this species are incorrect. The Eurasian Eagle Owl (Bubo bubo) has a length of 59–73 cm (23¼–28¾ in), weight 1.6–4.2 kg (3 lb 8 oz–9 lb 4 oz) and wingspan 138–170 cm (4 ft 6½ in–5 ft 7 in); thus slightly smaller (lighter) than B. blakistoni. B. lacteus is smaller still. Note that the length of 84 cm (33 in) sometimes given to the North American subspecies of Great Grey Owl (Strix nebulosa nebulosa) must be erroneus, as the length of the Palearctic subspecies (S. n. lapponica) is 58–68 cm (23–26¾ in), yet it is the heavier of the two (1.9 kg/4 lb 3 oz vs. 1.7 kg/3 lb 12 oz max. weight). Lengths and wingspans for the Palearctic species (B. bubo, S. nebulosa) are from Birds of Europe (Mullarney, Svensson, Zetterström et al.); note that recent studies have decreased the wingspans of the largest owls. The smallest owl is the Elf Owl (Micrathene whitneyi), 13–14.5 cm (5–5¾ in) in length and 36–48 g (1.27–1.69 oz) in weight. The Least Pygmy Owl (Glaucidium minutissimum) is shorter at 12–14 cm (4¾–5½ in), but heavier. --Anshelm '77 21:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article currently cites the Elf Owl as the smallest owl but the Elf Owl page states the Pygmy owl is the smallest. I assume the contradiction is in dimensions versus weight as Anshelm mentioned. I don't know enough about it to declare any facts but if someone could clarify which metric is being used in both articles that should fix it. --dmkrantz 4:08, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Alf Poier

Please remove the paragraph involving Alf Poier. It is false. He regularly defaces Wikipedia articles.


Why are useful edits being removed?

I was making some edits to add information to the page, accurate information, and someone removed them as soon as I put them up. I really don't understand this. The whole purpose of Wikipedia is access to reliable knowledge, not the censoring of information because someone wants their edits/version to be the only one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.77.149.199 (talk) 03:22, 9 August 2006

misc

"increasingly extinct"?

printing this page (owl) crashes my Firefox 1.5.0.8 -- any ideas? Sternthinker 00:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strigiformes

Strigiformes redirects here, but surely the order now includes nightjars now? Totnesmartin 23:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not widely accepted yet - the BOU haven't adopted it, not sure about the AOU. The enc isn't intended to lead trends, just to report the current majority view. jimfbleak 06:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
looks like my animal encyclopedia jumped the gun then. Oh well. Totnesmartin 11:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Highly dubious. If so, odds are it would have to include hummingbirds as well... nighjars seem to be closest to a group called Daedalornithes(sp?), which is hummers, swifts, and owlet-nightjars. Dysmorodrepanis 04:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great Horned Owl Genus?

The great horned owl picture is labeled as "genus 'blowey.'" What is the purpose of this? Great horned owls are members of the genus Bubo; I changed the caption to reflect this, but it was quickly reverted and I recieved a message warning me about vandalism. I realize now that the word "horned owl" links to the Bubo article, which notes that the name refers to their calls, but I see now reason for the word "blowey" to appear here.

Inconsistent number of species

There is inconsistent info about the number of species of owls:

"there are over 200 extant species"

"There are about 162 different species of owls alive today"

"There are some 225 extant species of owls"

Dougher 04:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Owls and More

(Some) People thinks that owls are closely related to eagles, hawks, etc. and I don't get why because eagles and owls look too much diffrent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Owlet12 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because they do not seem too closely related in fact. It is possible that they are about as close as storks are to cranes. But they are maybe just about as close to each other as sparrows are to storks. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main difference between owls and other raptors (Hawks, eagles and falcons) in their anatomy are that owls don't have a crop to store food so any food goes straight to their stomach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.93.3 (talk) 12:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fossil owls

A good fossil owl resource is http://nrm.museum/ve/birds/sape/GlobalOwlProject/Fossil_owls/Fossil.html (with plenty of PDF fulltexts!) Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 23:38, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


"The owl was a baker's daughter"

Would like to see a mention/explanation of "the owl was a baker's daughter" (Hamlet, Act 4, scene 5 - http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Tragedy_of_Hamlet%2C_Prince_of_Denmark/Act_4 ) -- perhaps the most famous quote on owls, but a rather puzzling one. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 23:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

owls feet

need info!

owl eyes

ahsdrdg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.99.174.126 (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Should there be a section on this? Things like Harry potter (with reference to name behind them) and things like 'The owl who was afraid of the dark' also to talk about how they are used in imaggery in writings Pureferret (talk) 23:30, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


a few changes

the section on behaviour was a little unclear. most owls are diurnal not nocturnal. of the 6 english native species only 2 are nocturnal. also it was unclear (to me anyway) if the article meant that all owls travel silently or not. I've cleared that up since the only truely silent owl is the barn owl even if the sound of the others in flight cannot be picked up by human ears. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.93.3 (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored some content you deleted regarding the fact that most owls are nocturnal. It is not an "urban myth", as you stated, and with over 200 species of owl, I do not think a selection of 6 species from one country is any indication of widespread commonality. I also searched extensively on whether or not the only silent owl (in flight) is the barn owl and could find no back-up for that statement, and as you provided no sources, I changed the text to how it read before. All of the information that I found indicated that the majority of owls are silent in flight, and I didn't find the article unclear on this point. It clearly states that silent flight is a crucial advantage in hunting, and that not all owls have this advantage. Also, you added text regarding the "viloplumes" used for feeling food. Please note that the correct term is "filoplumes"; I have also corrected this in the article. Maedin\talk 07:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


POV Issues

Just a cursory glance at this article seems to suggest some fairly serious pro-owl bias in this article. All the sections about owl behavior seem to imply that the owl is biologically predisposed to those behaviors, conveniently denying the owl of any agency when time comes for that owl to commit violent and predatory behavior. It seems that either serious revision or possibly deletion is necessary, Wikipedia is not the place to deny the world valuable understanding simply to serve your own (pro- or anti-owl) ends... 173.2.184.63 (talk) 23:46, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Owl&oldid=308969885"