![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
Is Thorondor himself an eagle? -- Timwi 00:47 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Regarding Sonny and Toucan Sam... they're on television and they're not real... sounds like they belong in the List of fictional birds to me...
If you disagree, please explain why first, rather than just removing them again. -- Dante Alighieri 18:59 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Owl (friend of Winnie-the-Pooh) is mentioned twice: once under Literature and again under Disney. At the very least one of the entries needs to be slightly different. Phil 13:04, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)
Anyone have the works of Liam O'Flaherty? They should be a good source.
I think T. H. White's Archimedes is a tawny owl. Can anyone confirm?
Are medieval beast fables literature or folklore?
-- JerryFriedman 01:32, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Is it a list of "fictional birds" (birds that aren't real) or "birds in fiction" (real birds used in books, songs, etc.)? There needs to be two lists.
Five17 18:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
What's with the "extinct" tabs on all those sports teams ?
The Pittsburgh Penguins still exist
myth 04:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This shouldn't be a list of FICTIONAL birds, many of them are believed in by members of certain religions or cultures. I propose changing it to mythological birds or something similar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.73.251 ( talk) 01:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure what the alternative is but "fictional" is not applying to much of this list. Birds in literature? Birds in entertainment? Famous Birds? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.194.35 ( talk) 19:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I am proposing that we merge together the list of fictional birds of prey, the list of fictional ducks, and the list of fictional penguins into this main article because:
Certainly there is an argument that the articles on birds of prey, ducks, and penguins should remain split from this parent article to avoid this article becoming entirely too long. However if this split is to be retained then we will have to rename this article "List of fictional birds (other)" and we will have to remove all of the birds of prey, ducks, and penguins to avoid redundancy. At this point I am leaning toward the first option (i.e. a merger). Are there any thoughts on the matter? - Thibbs ( talk) 21:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm now satisfied that the articles under discussion are in as good a shape as can "easily" be achieved. So I think it's time to re-open discussions about merging. As things stand currently, this article is 14,743 bytes in size. The sizes for the other lists are:
If all lists were merged together we'd have a list of around 36,726 (not counting the removal of duplicate entries of which there are many). This represents an increase to this article of about 2.5x. In the interest of providing context, prior to my intervention with this article it stood at
36,688 bytes. Thus if we were to merge all articles into one (again ignoring entry duplications) it would represent a rough 38 byte increase to the article from when I first began. If all duplicate entries are removed the merged mega-article would certainly be smaller than 36,688.
Understanding all that, however, I do recognize that one of the things that prompted me to act in the first place was the massive size of some of these articles. I can see that there is an argument that some of these sections (like list of fictional ducks for example) has become so massive that it would be best to keep them as a separate article even despite the above analysis. If we are to follow this course then I believe we should de-populate the sections of this article that cover animals split from the main list (e.g. ducks) by shifting them to the split article (e.g. list of fictional ducks).
I am open to ideas about what should be done to best manage these articles. At this point the merge I feel is most warranted is the "list of fictional owls" into the "list of fictional birds of prey." It would also be helpful to discuss whether we should rename this article "list of fictional birds (other)" or use {{main}} notation (as for example under a "Ducks" subsection) to direct readers to the main articles on that topic. What do people think? -
Thibbs (
talk)
14:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Excellent. I've gone ahead and done it then. The last thing I want to do with birds is to merge the owls into the other birds of prey as discussed earlier. This should reduce confusion as neither of those articles is organized biologically and thus {{main}} tags wouldn't work very well. Thanks for all the input. - Thibbs ( talk) 19:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
I have begun repairing this article by focusing on notability and layout. To this end I have re-drafted the lede to explicitly describe the inclusion criteria for the list (i.e. notable bird characters from fiction) and I have begun to merge the "list of birds by media form" subsections (e.g. "Birds in Comics") into the "list of birds by species" subsections. I think this is an important step to avoid the duplication that will otherwise inevitably result. For example the character of Toucan Sam can be listed as a "bird in commerce," a "Piciforme," and possibly even a "bird in film." I have decided to cut the "list of birds by media form" subsections because they are in general smaller and so the shift should be easier. I'll continue to explain some of my larger edits here to show my rationales for them. Cheers, - Thibbs ( talk) 20:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
where is Daffy duck? -- 190.53.177.181 ( talk) 03:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I've been noticing something strange in the Charadriiformes section. In one part, it tries to tell us about a character called "Abby", who is an avocet, but it just cuts off at "a female avocet in the". Another thing I found strange was that someone was adding in birds from a book called "Avifauna of Sardinia". Not sure about you guys, but to me that sounds more like a book about information on birds from the Italian island of Sardinia rather than a fictional story about birds from Sardinia. I've tried doing research on both of these and so far have found nothing. Hopefully someone can finish Abby's description and prove me wrong on the whole "Avifauna of Sardinia" thing. -- Budgielover2988 ( talk) 03:43, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of fictional birds. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Where do Jayhawks go in this list?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 11:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add a new item under "Struthioniformes". The name should be "Sweet Dee" from the show "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia". This was previously listed under a different section, then removed for an unknown reason. However, it's clear from Season 13 Episode 7 "The Gang Does a Clip Show" that Sweet Dee is an ostrich and is pictured in the source below:
https://i.imgur.com/jR1FgeU.jpg
Thank you Apokusin ( talk) 22:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
There is something that I would like to address. Using bulleted lists is efficient, but I find it that they do not provide enough information. Tables provide more information, and they are efficient, too. We have tables on the pages for the list of fictional marsupials and the list of fictional primates. I would propose replacing the bulleted lists on this article with tables.
Under each section, the tables would provide the name of the bird, its species, the title of the work it originated from and additional notes. Other data needed for specific media types will be included in the tables, too (for instance, in "Birds in literature," the tables would mention the book's author). The additional notes should only be brief summaries or notes regarding the work mentioned in the row.
Does anybody else think that the bulleted lists should be replaced with tables? -- Uptherial ( talk) 03:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
This page lists the Angry Birds together as if they are a single species. Many officially licensed books have revealed the true species of some of the characters, such as Red being a desert cardinal, and Stella being a galah. I mean, in the page for fictional birds of prey, Mighty Eagle and Silver have separate entries. That must also be applied here.
06:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
On the Angry Birds page, Terence is said to be a Red-tailed Hawk, but on that page it is said that He is a Northern Cardinal, should I correct this or not? 2804:1684:170:7800:2826:5F3E:9E73:70C8 ( talk) 19:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is Thorondor himself an eagle? -- Timwi 00:47 19 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Regarding Sonny and Toucan Sam... they're on television and they're not real... sounds like they belong in the List of fictional birds to me...
If you disagree, please explain why first, rather than just removing them again. -- Dante Alighieri 18:59 20 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Owl (friend of Winnie-the-Pooh) is mentioned twice: once under Literature and again under Disney. At the very least one of the entries needs to be slightly different. Phil 13:04, Dec 8, 2003 (UTC)
Anyone have the works of Liam O'Flaherty? They should be a good source.
I think T. H. White's Archimedes is a tawny owl. Can anyone confirm?
Are medieval beast fables literature or folklore?
-- JerryFriedman 01:32, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Is it a list of "fictional birds" (birds that aren't real) or "birds in fiction" (real birds used in books, songs, etc.)? There needs to be two lists.
Five17 18:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
What's with the "extinct" tabs on all those sports teams ?
The Pittsburgh Penguins still exist
myth 04:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
This shouldn't be a list of FICTIONAL birds, many of them are believed in by members of certain religions or cultures. I propose changing it to mythological birds or something similar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.233.73.251 ( talk) 01:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Not sure what the alternative is but "fictional" is not applying to much of this list. Birds in literature? Birds in entertainment? Famous Birds? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.110.194.35 ( talk) 19:23, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
I am proposing that we merge together the list of fictional birds of prey, the list of fictional ducks, and the list of fictional penguins into this main article because:
Certainly there is an argument that the articles on birds of prey, ducks, and penguins should remain split from this parent article to avoid this article becoming entirely too long. However if this split is to be retained then we will have to rename this article "List of fictional birds (other)" and we will have to remove all of the birds of prey, ducks, and penguins to avoid redundancy. At this point I am leaning toward the first option (i.e. a merger). Are there any thoughts on the matter? - Thibbs ( talk) 21:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm now satisfied that the articles under discussion are in as good a shape as can "easily" be achieved. So I think it's time to re-open discussions about merging. As things stand currently, this article is 14,743 bytes in size. The sizes for the other lists are:
If all lists were merged together we'd have a list of around 36,726 (not counting the removal of duplicate entries of which there are many). This represents an increase to this article of about 2.5x. In the interest of providing context, prior to my intervention with this article it stood at
36,688 bytes. Thus if we were to merge all articles into one (again ignoring entry duplications) it would represent a rough 38 byte increase to the article from when I first began. If all duplicate entries are removed the merged mega-article would certainly be smaller than 36,688.
Understanding all that, however, I do recognize that one of the things that prompted me to act in the first place was the massive size of some of these articles. I can see that there is an argument that some of these sections (like list of fictional ducks for example) has become so massive that it would be best to keep them as a separate article even despite the above analysis. If we are to follow this course then I believe we should de-populate the sections of this article that cover animals split from the main list (e.g. ducks) by shifting them to the split article (e.g. list of fictional ducks).
I am open to ideas about what should be done to best manage these articles. At this point the merge I feel is most warranted is the "list of fictional owls" into the "list of fictional birds of prey." It would also be helpful to discuss whether we should rename this article "list of fictional birds (other)" or use {{main}} notation (as for example under a "Ducks" subsection) to direct readers to the main articles on that topic. What do people think? -
Thibbs (
talk)
14:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Excellent. I've gone ahead and done it then. The last thing I want to do with birds is to merge the owls into the other birds of prey as discussed earlier. This should reduce confusion as neither of those articles is organized biologically and thus {{main}} tags wouldn't work very well. Thanks for all the input. - Thibbs ( talk) 19:36, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
I have begun repairing this article by focusing on notability and layout. To this end I have re-drafted the lede to explicitly describe the inclusion criteria for the list (i.e. notable bird characters from fiction) and I have begun to merge the "list of birds by media form" subsections (e.g. "Birds in Comics") into the "list of birds by species" subsections. I think this is an important step to avoid the duplication that will otherwise inevitably result. For example the character of Toucan Sam can be listed as a "bird in commerce," a "Piciforme," and possibly even a "bird in film." I have decided to cut the "list of birds by media form" subsections because they are in general smaller and so the shift should be easier. I'll continue to explain some of my larger edits here to show my rationales for them. Cheers, - Thibbs ( talk) 20:10, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
where is Daffy duck? -- 190.53.177.181 ( talk) 03:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I've been noticing something strange in the Charadriiformes section. In one part, it tries to tell us about a character called "Abby", who is an avocet, but it just cuts off at "a female avocet in the". Another thing I found strange was that someone was adding in birds from a book called "Avifauna of Sardinia". Not sure about you guys, but to me that sounds more like a book about information on birds from the Italian island of Sardinia rather than a fictional story about birds from Sardinia. I've tried doing research on both of these and so far have found nothing. Hopefully someone can finish Abby's description and prove me wrong on the whole "Avifauna of Sardinia" thing. -- Budgielover2988 ( talk) 03:43, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of fictional birds. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Where do Jayhawks go in this list?-- Paul McDonald ( talk) 11:11, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add a new item under "Struthioniformes". The name should be "Sweet Dee" from the show "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia". This was previously listed under a different section, then removed for an unknown reason. However, it's clear from Season 13 Episode 7 "The Gang Does a Clip Show" that Sweet Dee is an ostrich and is pictured in the source below:
https://i.imgur.com/jR1FgeU.jpg
Thank you Apokusin ( talk) 22:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
There is something that I would like to address. Using bulleted lists is efficient, but I find it that they do not provide enough information. Tables provide more information, and they are efficient, too. We have tables on the pages for the list of fictional marsupials and the list of fictional primates. I would propose replacing the bulleted lists on this article with tables.
Under each section, the tables would provide the name of the bird, its species, the title of the work it originated from and additional notes. Other data needed for specific media types will be included in the tables, too (for instance, in "Birds in literature," the tables would mention the book's author). The additional notes should only be brief summaries or notes regarding the work mentioned in the row.
Does anybody else think that the bulleted lists should be replaced with tables? -- Uptherial ( talk) 03:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
This page lists the Angry Birds together as if they are a single species. Many officially licensed books have revealed the true species of some of the characters, such as Red being a desert cardinal, and Stella being a galah. I mean, in the page for fictional birds of prey, Mighty Eagle and Silver have separate entries. That must also be applied here.
06:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
On the Angry Birds page, Terence is said to be a Red-tailed Hawk, but on that page it is said that He is a Northern Cardinal, should I correct this or not? 2804:1684:170:7800:2826:5F3E:9E73:70C8 ( talk) 19:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)