Talk:Black-throated finch

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 49.198.21.145 (talk) at 01:11, 27 February 2019 (→‎NPOV- decline). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAustralia Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconBlack-throated finch is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
Note icon
The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to help@wikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.
WikiProject iconBirds Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconBlack-throated finch 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-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.

NPOV- decline

The Black Throated Finch is currently a hot political topic in Australia. One of the main objections to the Carmichael Mine development is that it poses a threat to this species. There is no evidence that the population is in decline yet citation needed tags have been repeatedly deleted along with article problem tags and current Queensland goverment references in favour of older, less evidence based articles in order to support the political agenda served by stating that the population is in decline which is stated three times in this article. sensational yellow journalism articles should not replace peer reviewed research and citations from peer reviewed research should not be deleted in favour of news articles. statements from NGOs who do not support their statements with verifiable research should be regarded as suspicious especially when their opinions conflict with peer reviewed articles or articles published in reputable ornithology journals.

please do not remove the problem tags until the issue has been resolved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.198.21.145 (talk) 09:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Um, yeah it is so non-threatened that is why it has a recovery plan. This (official government plan) says southern subspecies has disappeared from 80% of its former range and halved its population. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the reference and there is no evidence to support those claims. the recovery plan was also written by an NGO(BTF Recovery Team) opposed to the Carmichael Mine. it specifically listed some possible causes for its supposed decline which were omitted in the edits to the article and deleted from the article when i posted them, specifically, hybridisation. the article also confuses the northern and southern subspecies. references i posted which were authored by the federal government were also deleted in which it specifically mentions that no study has been undertaken regarding its range or population. [1][2][3] it further reiterates that the only existing population estimate is of low reliability no less than 5 times. an editor also felt the need to revert updates to references to keep obsolete government pages instead of up to date current advice on the subject from the same department, reverting to archived 10 year old stub-type summary articles. those articles give this reference as their source, stating unequivocally that the decline is fact, as opposed to of 'low reliability', a drastic misinterpretation of the source. In the advice to the Minister, no evidence was submitted to support admission as a threatened species but it was approved on the basis of suspicion, "suspected to have undergone or is likely to undergo in the immediate future a very severe, severe or substantial reduction in numbers." 49.198.21.145 (talk) 01:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Poephila cincta cincta — Southern Black-throated Finch". Department of the Environment. 2019. Retrieved February 27, 2019.
  2. ^ http://www.environment.gov.au/node/16484#conservation. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  3. ^ "Southern Black-throated Finch (Poephila cincta cincta): Advice to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage from the Threatened Species Scientific Committee (TSSC) on Amendments to the list of Threatened Species under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act)". Department of the Environment. February 14, 2005.