Text of dispute
Please do not Americanise my spelling, particularly in an article about an Old World topic. 19:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I have reviewed many of the edits on the original article as well as this talk page, and I find no justification whatsoever for altering the article. It may have started by some well-meaning American who honestly felt that "characterised" was a misspelling of "characterized" (I admit I didn't look that far back). Regardless of how the war began, the article should be left in in the current dialect, Ye Olde Englishe (just teasing), and if the Americanizer (see, it's my native dialect too) continues to 'correct' the spelling of words that are already spelled correctly, it is my opinion he should be dealt with as a vandal by WikiAdmins. Let's hope this ends the problem. I will remove the request for a third opinion. Aumakua 19:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
<begin tongue-in-cheek-rant>
What the devil is the use of a page on pheasants, talking about their sexual dimorphisms and beautiful plumage, when there's nothing about how to cook the damn things? I mean, what's the point of being a pheasant if not for me to eat it? Here we have a perfectly good resource on Pheasants, with narry a word about roastin', or sauteein', or fricaseein', or stuffin', or orange sauce, or cream, or pheasant au vin, or pheasant en croute... What, I ask, is the point?
<end tongue-in-cheek-rant>
The following was removed from the article:
This may or may not be true (it is certainly not true for at least some species), but it is extraordinary, and should be cited. Consequently, I moved it here to the talk page for others to find sources and/or disagree. TableManners ( talk) 02:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
How come the Monals/Lophophorus are not listed under the list of species? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.167.219.53 ( talk) 19:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
AFAIK, in the USA, the term "Ring-necked pheasant" refers to Phasianus colchicus, and Phasianus colchicus is generally known as the Ring-necked pheasant.
E.g.:
What is the relationship between this article and Phasianidae? If this article should not be merged with Phasianidae, it should at least link to it and explain the difference in scope between the articles. It is also unclear to me if the Category:Phasianidae is appropriate. PJTraill ( talk) 19:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I hope the English version spat of ten years ago was resolved in favor of American shpelling. Just joking, I'm irrationally American on this subject, and W-pedia was founded in the US, but we have to be fair to that minority of English speakers across the Pond who insist on archaic misspellings. That said, this article says NOTHING about the geographic origins of the various pheasant species. Whilst this is forgivable, it is an enormous oversight. Tapered ( talk) 04:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I think that an interesting addition to this article could discuss the history of pheasants as a game bird. Pheasants are a commonly hunted game animal and even stocked in regions of North America. An inclusion of the game history of pheasants would be an interesting addition.
Alecthefruitbat ( talk) 19:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
-- Alecthefruitbat ( talk) 02:42, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Both of these are pretty much the same page with little differences -- Cs california ( talk) 02:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
...
See here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasan 2A02:908:2813:F180:1445:F70A:B2BE:4B74 ( talk) 01:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Text of dispute
Please do not Americanise my spelling, particularly in an article about an Old World topic. 19:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I have reviewed many of the edits on the original article as well as this talk page, and I find no justification whatsoever for altering the article. It may have started by some well-meaning American who honestly felt that "characterised" was a misspelling of "characterized" (I admit I didn't look that far back). Regardless of how the war began, the article should be left in in the current dialect, Ye Olde Englishe (just teasing), and if the Americanizer (see, it's my native dialect too) continues to 'correct' the spelling of words that are already spelled correctly, it is my opinion he should be dealt with as a vandal by WikiAdmins. Let's hope this ends the problem. I will remove the request for a third opinion. Aumakua 19:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
<begin tongue-in-cheek-rant>
What the devil is the use of a page on pheasants, talking about their sexual dimorphisms and beautiful plumage, when there's nothing about how to cook the damn things? I mean, what's the point of being a pheasant if not for me to eat it? Here we have a perfectly good resource on Pheasants, with narry a word about roastin', or sauteein', or fricaseein', or stuffin', or orange sauce, or cream, or pheasant au vin, or pheasant en croute... What, I ask, is the point?
<end tongue-in-cheek-rant>
The following was removed from the article:
This may or may not be true (it is certainly not true for at least some species), but it is extraordinary, and should be cited. Consequently, I moved it here to the talk page for others to find sources and/or disagree. TableManners ( talk) 02:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
How come the Monals/Lophophorus are not listed under the list of species? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.167.219.53 ( talk) 19:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
AFAIK, in the USA, the term "Ring-necked pheasant" refers to Phasianus colchicus, and Phasianus colchicus is generally known as the Ring-necked pheasant.
E.g.:
What is the relationship between this article and Phasianidae? If this article should not be merged with Phasianidae, it should at least link to it and explain the difference in scope between the articles. It is also unclear to me if the Category:Phasianidae is appropriate. PJTraill ( talk) 19:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I hope the English version spat of ten years ago was resolved in favor of American shpelling. Just joking, I'm irrationally American on this subject, and W-pedia was founded in the US, but we have to be fair to that minority of English speakers across the Pond who insist on archaic misspellings. That said, this article says NOTHING about the geographic origins of the various pheasant species. Whilst this is forgivable, it is an enormous oversight. Tapered ( talk) 04:06, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
I think that an interesting addition to this article could discuss the history of pheasants as a game bird. Pheasants are a commonly hunted game animal and even stocked in regions of North America. An inclusion of the game history of pheasants would be an interesting addition.
Alecthefruitbat ( talk) 19:55, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
-- Alecthefruitbat ( talk) 02:42, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Both of these are pretty much the same page with little differences -- Cs california ( talk) 02:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
...
See here: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasan 2A02:908:2813:F180:1445:F70A:B2BE:4B74 ( talk) 01:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)