This article is written in
British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
Mascarene parrot is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the
discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not
substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article was
copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on
extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the
project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
I check pages listed in
Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for
orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of
Mascarene Parrot's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Lost Land":
From
Small Mauritian flying fox: Cheke, A. S.; Hume, J. P. (2008). Lost Land of the Dodo: an Ecological History of Mauritius, Réunion & Rodrigues. T. & A. D. Poyser.
ISBN978-0-7136-6544-4.
From
Réunion Pink Pigeon: Anthony S. Cheke & Julian Hume (2008). Lost Land of the Dodo: an Ecological History of Mauritius, Réunion & Rodrigues. T. & A. D. Poyser.
ISBN978-0-7136-6544-4.
From
Mascarene Grey Parakeet: Cheke, A. S.; Hume, J. P. (2008). Lost Land of the Dodo: an Ecological History of Mauritius, Réunion & Rodrigues. New Haven and London: T. & A. D. Poyser. pp. 37–56.
ISBN978-0-7136-6544-4.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not.
AnomieBOT⚡01:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)reply
Maybe note whether the taxobox image was based on life or taxidermy accounts
It is not known for any of the images, actually. My guess is it is a dead specimen, but it wasn't stated in the original publication.
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:46, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
The Mascarene Parrot was first mentioned in 1674 -- in science? In Western literature?
and the name is a reference to Pedro Mascarenhas, who discovered the Mascarene Islands -- I realize the islands were named after the person, but the body text says that the bird was named after the islands
Why did some authors think it was a coracopsine? Also, am I interpreting correctly that this hypothesis is no longer favored in modern sources?
Genetic data supports it, morphological data does not. I think the early authors classified it as such because of its dark colouration, but I haven't found a source that specifically states this. I'll take a more thorough look.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
Now added, some features are not unique to the Coracopsis parrots, such as naked skin near the base of the beak, but the dark ("raven") plumage is, so added that.
FunkMonk (
talk)
09:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
I'm not getting why the discussion of flightlessness is there, since the Mascarene Parrot wasn't flightless
It is because if the bird was flightless, it would had been wiped out by the erupting vulcano. So the fact that it isn't flightless might indicate its ancestors arrived after the eruption, or that it is one of the few species to survive the event. A bit convoluted, but so is the source, which was published before the genetic data...
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
Perhaps the paragraph would be clearer if it started off talking about the two hypotheses for the Marscarene Parrot (evolved before/survived volcanic eruption vs colonized island after), and maybe remove the talk about flightlessness altogether, as since the bird was obviously not flightless I'm not sure how it adds anything to the line of reasoning. --
Yzx (
talk)
19:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
Sources don't state it, so I guess it is unknown, same with Feuilly, who the sources specifically state is only known by his last name.
FunkMonk (
talk)
08:57, 4 June 2013 (UTC)reply
The only Réunion species that disappeared after the Mascarene Parrot -- I assume this is bird species, since
List of extinct animals of Réunion says the Flying Fox survived to later
Hi,
SandyGeorgia, in regard to the double image under description where you left a note, I considered the various options when I did it, and here are my thoughts. 1: the adjacent text talks specifically about Martinet's plate currently placed on the left (this was originally the only image there), so I thought it should be "first", and therefore left where it is now, facing towards the text. 2: The second image is also by Martinet, but isn't actually discussed in the source, but I put it there because it is still relevant to the point about different Martinet plates using different colours, but if I find a different version of the first plate with different colours (which would therefore also face left), I would use that instead. 3: I think it isn't so straightforward which is the "correct" way to make the subjects of the images face in a case like this where they face different ways. I'd argue that the current configuration, where the gallery is right aligned, and the left bird faces the text, but the other one away, is just as valid as one where the left bird faces away, but the right bird faces the text. In either case, one bird faces the text, but in the current version, at least the one closest to the text is the one facing it, (which I think would be closer to "correct"). But in the end, I think it is very subjective in cases like this, and I doubt those who wrote the MOS ever had it in mind.
FunkMonk (
talk)
21:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply