May I present you with BirdFiles?

As of this morning, there are still duplicates for:

Cooper's Hawk
Eastern Screech Owl
Red-winged Blackbird

Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) Note: H in Hawk should be capitalized
Cooper's Hawk (Accipiter cooperii) Note: Delete

There is a Red-winged Blackbird with a hyphen and one without.

Eastern Screech Owl (Megascops asio)
Eastern Screech-Owl (Otus asio) Note: Otus asio is a former name ?



This message was edited Dec 30, 2008 11:52 AM

There are still some of kniphofia's without an order, don't know if there has been a request by dmail but I will list them here anyway just in case they get left.

Rook, Order: Passeriformes

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/go/163/

Mute swan, Order: Anseriformes

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/go/160/

Oystercatcher, Order: Ciconiiformes , also the common name: Eurasian Oystercatcher perhaps added.

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/go/157/

Ural owl, Order: Strigiformes

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/go/171/

I wanted to enter the Black Vulture (Aegypius monachus) into Bird Files but Wikipedia gives two possible order names, what do I fill in then or perhaps both?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Black_Vulture

bonitin, a google with the scientic name adding the word 'itis' will give you the official and current details.

Ciconiiformes is given on ITIS which is neither of those! The common name is also given as Cinereous Vulture but you could include both.

http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=all&search_value=Aegypius+monachus&search_kingdom=every&search_span=exactly_for&categories=All&source=html&search_credRating=All

This Dutch site gives Accipitriformes as the Order.

http://www.soortenbank.nl/soorten.php?soortengroep=vogels&menuentry=soorten&id=89&tab=classificatie

ITIS gives Ciconiiformes as the Order! That is still another name than the two of Wikipedia (Falconiformes or Accipitriformes)!!
Very confusing!

Sorry bonitin, no site but itis should be taken as valid.

Oh we cross-posted! Thanks I will use Ciconiiformes then.

this was the link I forgot to add;
http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=all&search_value=Aegypius+monachus&search_kingdom=every&search_span=exactly_for&categories=All&source=html&search_credRating=All

When I tried to enter it in Bird Files with the nomenclature of ITIS it said this entry already exists, but the Order name is filled in as Falconiformes and not Ciconiiformes (ITIS)
Could you please change that, thank you!

The use of Ciconiiformes in ITIS to lump together Falconiformes, Ciconiiformes, Charadriiformes, Pelecaniformes and Procellariiformes, seems to me the most ridiculous piece of so called scientific re-assessment. It is clearly based on genetic work, but overlooks such obvious physical differences that it merely suggests that the genetic work is so far unable to detect the differences that clearly exist.

We are so far retaining all the above Orders in BirdFiles, so the Black Vulture should go into Falconiformes

Ken

To clarify, I think I was the one who called ITIS into the mix early on (over a common name, not scientific.)

And I did that only because I was familiar with it from PlantFiles--I don't know enough about their authority to say they should always be relied upon as the final arbiter of any taxonomy or nomenclature questions.

Quoting Linthicum's post #5933838 of Dec. 27, 2008:

I am very concerned some members are already using the Bird Files as a personal photo library, and DO NOT understand the proper use of such a fills.

The Bird Files should be limited to only the very highest quality pictures, which would be useful for the proper identification of a species. We have just started, and there is far too much garbage already.

One member has posted 21 of the 22 entries for the Ring-necked Pheasant, and similar large numbers, of poor quality photos, for other species. I consider this to be completely unreasonable.

I welcome further discussion on this issue.

Gary Rasmussen

All I can say is this man Grassmusen has incredible cheek. Let the public decide if these are poor quality pictures, and are not a personal picture library. They are varied and I would consider cover many aspects of this bird.

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/go/36/

Please, anyone else wanting to check the general quality of my pics then feel free to look at them from my info page. I can't say all pics are the best but whose are, we use what we have to illustrate. Also look at how rude this man can be, and I cannot believe he has chose to execute his revenge on here.

If I were using it as a photo gallery I would have added many more pics, but chose only one or two for each situation or bird. The pic he has chosen to call poor is not in fact poor, but was against a wire fence, and it was a young female, the only pic I had of a young female and was on a dull day. If I had wanted to use it as a picture gallery I would not have posted it.

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/937786/

There is nothing wrong with the quality of any of those photos!!

Thank you 3g! How about checking out some of my other 'poor quality' pics too!

http://davesgarden.com/guides/birdfiles/showimage/1601/

Beautiful!!

Thank you!

You just don't get it!

Linthicum consistently posts the highest professional quality photos, on the bird watching threads. He has said, three pictures per species is the most he should post to a data base. If the very best photographer believes 3 pictures is the most he should post, where do you get off, thinking it fine to post 15 to 20 pictures per species?

Only the very best, of the best, is good enough for a data base to be used for bird identification. If you wish to start a thread on a spices, fine. Do so in the bird watching form -- where it belongs.

It doesn't belong in the data base.

You are posting in the wrong form!!!!!!!

Gary Rasmussen

Dave's Garden is :

For Gardeners, By Gardeners.

Bird Files is a part of Dave's garden. Don't you get it?

Whoa.

Let's not turn this into a personal debate. I don't think the comment above was necessary, but no one person was named, so let's assume no personal offense was intended.

But let's do step back and objectively consider the concern that Gary has raised, albeit a little more bluntly than necessary.

We've never had hard-and-fast rules for the number of photos posted, but within our "files" (plant, bug, and now bird), we do reserve the right to refuse photos that are too similar, misnamed, or of poor quality. (That is not a comment on anyone's photos, just a general statement about our stance.)

PlantFiles actually has a "vettting" process that the editors and UBERs participate in, to screen images before they are posted. That cuts down on duplicates, inappropriate or misnamed photos, as well as screens photos for quality.

At this point, we are relying on our members (our bird enthusiasts are nothing if not passionate about birds AND good photographers ;o), so let's be as reasonable and considerate as we are enthusiastic about this project.

When a few people each post a dozen-plus shots (many of them very similar) to a particular file, it will--in the long run--discourage anyone else from posting a photo, since they don't see where their image could be anything but redundant. I encourage you to post your best shot, or maybe two.

If you have a particular shot of the bird that is helpful for identification purposes (upclose showing its markings, coloration, etc.) then look for opportunities to post those images first, and the distance shots secondarily, if at all.

There is a contact us button at the bottom of this page. Please use it for questions of this type.

As some birds look different as to sex, season and age I can see where several photos may be required for someone needing an ID.

Personally I learn a lot and I'm sure others do too, with the pics wallaby so generously submits, we not only get good pics of species in different situations and illustrations of behaviour but on top of that valuable founded information!

I know there is the possibility to give that information in the comments but that wouldn't be the same as it is much more clear to have it beside the picture that illustrates it.

I think we cannot thank her enough for her great contributions!
I witnessed in several occasions that she stimulates people to enter a specie into the files when they got the ID they asked for.

And I love to see plenty of pictures of a specie, they all contribute to a better insight in one way or another.



This message was edited Dec 31, 2008 12:10 PM

I agree with Gary and Terry, it's not necessary to post a huge amount of photos of the same bird.

Terry, Thanks for clarifying about the ITIS. I think there may be some further discussion
about it later on.

I agree with Linth about a reasonable number of pictures in the Bird Files from each member. If there is a male,female and juvenile or just 3 of your best pics for each bird that should be fine.

Thanks Terry just read your reply. It's early here. ^_^

I appreciate all the great research and work that all of you have done in getting BirdFiles up and running. It will be so helpful in the future.

Maybe a clean start on a new thread would be good at this time. Post count is now over 200. I don't have any worthy information to begin anew, so I will leave it to another person.

I do think I have the right of appeal on not being named here, the very fact that Grasmussen named the Ring-necked Pheasant has named me, and if no-one has read his comments on the link I gave under the picture then please do.

I do think what we are looking at is a sort of God-worshipping towards Linthicum here, and I hate to say it Grasmussen as I do not like to comment on the quality of anyone else's pics, but Linthicum did put in a very poor quality pic yesterday, one I wouldn't have put in unless there was no others but that must have been the case. Sorry Linthicum, but as you are being mentioned here as an idolic symbol then it had to be said. If this makes me unpopular with the bird fraternity, then so be it, I care not if that is the sort of attitude I am going to be coming up against.

kniphofia, I'm sorry you also chose to beef here, but then you have a beef with me for trying to sort out your entries which you failed to do, and you had ample opportunity to do it. I don't suppose you noticed that the Orders have now been listed, I don't know what would have happened to your entries if they had been left without Orders.

There has been other occasions where some people on here have chose to attack me for no good reason. May I say that there is a possible reason for this one person to have attacked me, but really I should not air that here as it is unbelievably petty on his part, nothing to do with me at all.

Once more I have reason to think that perhaps Daves is not the place for me. Thank you to those who think I am worthy of adding pics to an entry to which no-one else was likely to add the different sexes, ages, season and situations with comments to match so as people may understand these birds. If you did not look at all the pictures and read the comments, then please do.

Thanks for the nudge--a new thread is here: http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/938086/