Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds

Trying to produce a clade for Pica (bird) (the first one of the two on the page) and find it totally impenetrable. By trial and error (about 20 preview attempts!) it's close-ish, but not there yet. The spike at the top needs trimming off. Could someone assist, please, and are there any simple instructions for making them anywhere? Thanks! - MPF (talk) 22:09, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Took a quick look - first one you just had the wrong number for the first clade (2 instead of 1). Couldn't figure out the second one on mobile. Personally I've written these in Notepad or something before copying over, and using tabs/spacing to make sure all my groups and subgroups line up right without any extraneous parenthesis or wrong numbers. Hope that helps! grungaloo (talk) 01:40, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@Grungaloo super, thanks! - MPF (talk) 01:42, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind, but I took a stab at the second cladogram too. I think I read the reference right - please correct any mistakes though! grungaloo (talk) 17:34, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@Grungaloo thanks! Yes, that one had also looked incorrect, but I'd not created it so hadn't tried to do anything with it - MPF (talk) 12:23, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

• Cladograms can be requested at WP:treereq. FunkMonk (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

Petrel's content is largely redundant with Procellariiformes. The only use I can see it having is to accommodate the clade that excludes albatrosses from the rest of the tubenoses, and even then it doesn't solve the underlying issue of the page's content being both redundant and poorly cited. There's also the issue of higher level phylogenies often being unstable, which makes the monophyly of the "petrel clade" ambiguous. Therefore I suggest the best course of action would be to merge the two pages. Anthropophoca (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

@Anthropophoca agree a merge is sensible; cf. previous discussions like Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds/Archive 76#Vernacular name pages - MPF (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I made some straightforward edits on Ornithology but they are being contested without explanation. If other's could add their thoughts, that would be appreciated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ornithology#Explaining_reverted_edits PorcelainChicken (talk) 20:30, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps it's a double-standard, but domestic birds typically aren't classified as subspecies as domestic mammals are. However, Wikipedia often erroneously treats them as such. I suggest using {{Population taxobox}}, {{Infobox poultry breed}} or creating a new template.

Examples of this mistake:

• Domestic duck
• Domestic turkey
• Chicken
• Domestic pigeon
• Society finch
• Domestic canary

Neither Clements, nor IOC nor AviList classifies these as subspecies. Note: for domestic duck, I checked for both domestic mallard and domestic Muscovy duck. Limeness (talk) 04:09, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

On a related note, Barbary dove erroneously treats the Barbary dove as a species. And Feral pigeon uses the taxobox for Columba livia. And please see the taxobox on Domestic goose. Limeness (talk) 04:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Good call! Yes, this definitely needs attention, these so-called "domestica" fake subspecies have a way of proliferating. Unfortunately, even though invalid, they frequently appear in otherwise citeable scientific literature in journals that really ought to know better - MPF (talk) 00:56, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: The domestic mallard, domestic Muscovy and chicken are not subspecies in modern taxonomy. I suppose I should have mentioned this discussion, or perhaps at least stated that they're not subspecies under IOC, or mentioned Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/References. Even though Wikipedia:WikiProject Bird/References cites IOC as Wikipedia's source of taxonomic information for birds, it seems to be quite a popular opinion that it should switch to AviList, so some people are prematurely switching articles over to AviList's taxonomy. But AviList doesn't treat these three domestic birds as subspecies either. Limeness (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for discussing. I have a quaint old-fashioned notion that Wikipedia used to be an evidence-based encyclopedia in which everything in the lead and infobox was cited in the article body. In that antique arrangement, an editor wishing to update an article found a newer and better source, edited the main text from it, added the citation, and adjusted the lead and infobox to suit. Editors not doing this got notices about citing their sources on their user pages; then they got blocked. But of course, as the modern doctor said in Moliere's play The Doctor in Spite of Himself, "We've done away with all that".

I have no opinion about the taxonomy, and will welcome whatever newly-sourced changes may be needed, but assertions about what "modern taxonomy" does aren't the same as actual sources in situ in article text. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:45, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I see the editor above has repeated his edits and has been blocked as a sockpuppet. I've reverted the two edits as the recent work of a blocked sock. This has no effect on the general question on this thread, nor on any future decision. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:55, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Quick facts Domestic mallard, Scientific classification ...

Domestic mallard
Khaki Campbell duck
Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Chordata
Class:	Aves
Order:	Anseriformes
Family:	Anatidae
Genus:	Anas
Species:	A. platyrhynchos
Domesticate:	Domestic mallard

Close

I wonder if {{population taxobox}} is appropriate for some of these domesticates. The template was introduced for the former subspecies of big cats, which were lumped into more broadly defined subspecies. These were well-characterised natural groups. This might be suitable for birds where there is a single domestication event (e.g. the mallard domesticate, chickens) but some of the others listed above seem less clear (possible multiple domestication events and hybrids). So I was thinking perhaps a {{domesticate taxobox}} would be more suitable, being agnostic on the origins (single, multiple, hybrid).

To my surprise {{population taxobox}} can already handle this using |population_rank_name=Domesticate. If considered a suitable solution I can create a separate template that uses a more obvious parameter.  —  Jts1882 | talk  10:50, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello all :) I've been working on a list of birds of Zanzibar and any help to get it closer to completion would be appreciated. 🀰☯🀰Hexes54☯Talk to me🀰☯🀰 09:19, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I hope this helps: here is a list from AviList v2025, species and subspecies, where the column "Range" contains 'Zanzibar' or 'Pemba' or 'Unguja' or 'Mafia':

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guttera pucherani (Hartlaub, KJG, 1861)

Tauraco fischeri zanzibaricus Pakenham, RHW, 1938

Streptopelia capicola tropica (Reichenow, A, 1902)

Columba delegorguei sharpei (Salvadori, AT, 1893)

Turtur afer (Linnaeus, C, 1766)

Treron pembaensis Pakenham, RHW, 1940

Treron calvus granti (Van Someren, VGL, 1919)

Ichthyaetus hemprichii (Bruch, CF, 1855)

Caprimulgus fossii welwitschii Bocage, JVB, 1867

Telacanthura ussheri stictilaema (Reichenow, A, 1879)

Apus affinis affinis (Gray, JE, 1830)

Glaucidium capense ngamiense (Roberts, A, 1932)

Otus pembaensis Pakenham, RHW, 1937

Strix woodfordii nigricantior (Sharpe, RB, 1897)

Aerospiza tachiro pembaensis (Benson, CW; Elliott, HFI, 1975)

Apaloderma narina littorale Van Someren, VGL, 1931

Lophoceros alboterminatus Büttikofer, J, 1889

Ispidina picta picta (Boddaert, P, 1783)

Pogoniulus bilineatus fischeri (Reichenow, A, 1880)

Campethera maculosa cailliautii (Malherbe, A, 1849)

Poicephalus cryptoxanthus tanganyikae Bowen, WW, 1930

Dryoscopus cubla affinis (Gray, GR, 1837)

Laniarius sublacteus (Cassin, J, 1851)

Platysteira peltata cryptoleuca Oberholser, HC, 1905

Batis soror Reichenow, A, 1903

Trochocercus cyanomelas bivittatus Reichenow, A, 1879

Terpsiphone viridis ungujaensis (Grant, CHB; Mackworth-Praed, CW, 1947)

Camaroptera brachyura pileata Reichenow, A, 1891

Cisticola juncidis uropygialis (Fraser, L, 1843)

Phedina borbonica madagascariensis Hartlaub, KJG, 1860

Eurillas virens zanzibarica Pakenham, RHW, 1935

Eurillas virens zombensis (Shelley, GE, 1894)

Zosterops vaughani Bannerman, DA, 1924

Illadopsis distans (Friedmann, H, 1928)

Notopholia corusca vaughani (Bannerman, DA, 1926)

Neocossyphus rufus rufus (Fischer, GA; Reichenow, A, 1884)

Tychaedon quadrivirgata greenwayi (Moreau, RE, 1938)

Hedydipna collaris elachior (Mearns, EA, 1910)

Cyanomitra olivacea changamwensis Mearns, EA, 1910

Cyanomitra olivacea granti Vincent, J, 1934

Cyanomitra veroxii zanzibarica (Grote, H, 1932)

Cinnyris pembae Reichenow, A, 1905

Euplectes nigroventris Cassin, J, 1848

Spermestes fringilloides (de Lafresnaye, NFAA, 1835)

Padda oryzivora (Linnaeus, C, 1758)

Estrilda astrild minor (Cabanis, JL, 1878)

Pytilia melba grotei Reichenow, A, 1919

Crithagra mozambica mozambica (Müller, PLS, 1776)

(48 rows) Kweetal nl (talk) 11:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Took a quick look: my suggestion, it needs to be matched to IOC taxonomy & names, not clements; thus e.g. Fulvous whistling duck, not Fulvous whistling-duck, grey plover not black-bellied plover, etc.; also check spellings match local English usage. Also, where possible (granted it's not easy!) use photos taken in Zanzibar to illustrate the page. - MPF (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Edit: removed 'Geokichla guttata lippensi' -> because Upemba is not Pemba...