Talk:Common pochard

Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Birds Low‑importance

Common pochard 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

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

Europe Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested moves

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved by Materialscientist. --BDD (talk) 19:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

– Invert the redirections as the consensus and guidelines recommend not to capitalise the common (vernacular) names of species. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Bird common name decapitalisation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Animals, plants, and other organisms. Coreyemotela (talk) 13:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy move per new naming consensus regarding birds at WP:FAUNA. Due to the new consensus, these moves could have been requested at WP:RMTR. Steel1943 (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see any new consensus about bird common name capitalization when I clicked on the WP:FAUNA link. In the past, the decision has been to go with the capitalization standard that was advocated by some big bird group. Now apparently there has been a discussion and the previous standard has been changed? Could a link be added here to exactly where that discussion is? --Davefoc (talk) 16:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the example of Bald eagle is considered the definitive source on what the standard for Wikipedia bird common name capitalization? I don't think any big bird article capitalization standardization effort should be undertaken until there is a very solid consensus established and a completely unambiguous Wikipedia rule in place. Maybe that is the case but I haven't seen it. --Davefoc (talk) 16:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cite Q template causes CITEVAR error

Resolved

MeegsC, can you please replace the Cite Q template that you added with a normal {{cite journal}} template, or otherwise fix the WP:CITEVAR author formatting problem? Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I found {{Cite Q|Q112271116|expand=yes}} in the Cite Q documentation and have used that trick to fix multiple citation errors in that reference. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's good @Jonesey95:, because I didn't introduce the Cite Q template and have no idea how to use it. If you'd checked the history, you'd have seen it was MargaretRDonald who introduced that problematic template. ;) MeegsC (talk) 22:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake, and apologies. I misread the history. Your addition of CS1 templates and sfn templates was nicely done. It turns out that editor in question has been asked to comply with CITEVAR in the past. The work of gnomes is never done. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]