Talk:Australian ringneck

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleAustralian ringneck has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 15, 2006Good article nomineeListed
November 9, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
August 10, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article


Initial comments[edit]

Port Lincoln Parrot should probably redirect to Australian Ringneck, as that seems to be the currently accepted scientific classification common name. --Takver 14:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a check on the name this evening, and if so, we can request a move by an admin. Kim van der Linde at venus 14:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Shall leave it to you to check and contact an admin if a move is necessary.--Takver 14:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs to be moved to Australian ring neck or seperated back out to each sub species as the Port Lincoln Parrot is only a sub species name. The article should have the status for each sub species as the Twenty Eight has been classified as threatened. Gnangarra 00:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved back to Australian ring neck Gnangarra

Endemic[edit]

Although endemic is technically correct in the context, the general use is for more restricited areas. Maybe we just should avoid the confusion. Kim van der Linde at venus 13:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Subspecies status[edit]

I do not think the subspecies status is now needed anymore, so we can remove that as the status is the same for all subspecies. Kim van der Linde at venus 02:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

agreed Gnangarra 06:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment[edit]

This article does not seem to be up to standard so I have nominated it for GAR. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 12:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a result of the discussion at WP:GAR, the consensus decision was to keep the article. Some minor fixes were noted, those were made, and there was no support to delist the article. An archive of this discussion can be found at: Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Archive 32. Please continue to improve this article. Happy editing! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GAR[edit]

I have nominated this article for GAR giving my reasons. See link in template at top of page. Snowman (talk) 10:05, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomic order[edit]

Can subspecies be put in taxonomic order? What is taxonimic order? I have put them in the table in the same order that they were on the page originally. Snowman (talk) 12:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The checklists often assume a taxonomic order of species (like a 2 dimensional slice of a cladogram). I've not seen it done for subspecies, and the consensus seems to be that macgillivrayi is actually genetically closer to zonarius than barnardi (!) - the closest I can think of would be what I change the page to in about 5 seconds...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Looks great. Good thing about parrots in that we have loads of pix :) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have been looking for a better image of the "Port Lincoln" showing yellow on its abdomen. What do you make of the images on commons? What are the ones with red foreheads and a yellow abdomens? You need to look in the two species categories as they are divided into two species there. Snowman (talk) 14:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting that the nominate is not at the top of the table. Snowman (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ug, now I have images being deleted at commons, man the panorama act is tough! I'll try to look tomorrow. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, it is Twenty-eight Parrot, not Twenty Eight...Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:29, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful if taxonomic order was explained, perhaps on the Alpha taxonomy or taxonomy page or somewhere else, and also explain if taxonomic order applies to subspecies or not. Snowman (talk) 14:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree (sort of) but now, this is the thing. The page as it stands doesn't mention taxonomic order as such, and I haven't seen an official list in such an order as as far as I know it doesn't apply to subspecies (but I may be wrong). Maybe Sabines Sunbird will know..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
More comments on this topic are welcome, because the "Greater Crested Tern" article has got a table headed "Subspecies in taxonomic order". Snowman (talk) 17:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aaah, good point! Do you want to cut-and-paste it to the bird wikiproject talk page? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I have just started a new section on this topic on the bird talk page. Snowman (talk) 22:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian ringneck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:55, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Australian ringneck. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:39, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Australian_ringneck&oldid=1222129070"