 |
288 - of course you're not talking rot!
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
289
Just for interest please see comments on this Turaco.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
290 ** RESOLVED ** (tags corrected)
Plain Chachalaca tagged as White-bellied:
www.flickr.com/photos/jvverde/214470803/
www.flickr.com/photos/jvverde/214471064/
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
291RESOLVED
Reddish Egrets tagged as Snowy Egret
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
mpgoodey (a group admin) edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
 |
I've corrected the ID's, but the tags need to be changed:
292 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/fabrica-imago/106092090/
293 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/rwkphotos/1439789678/
294 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/naniqui/532355909/
295 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/75044163@N00/1445091490/
296 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/birddog/1348389794/
297 (** RESOLVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/rick_leche/1572237928/
298 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/b_huggins/244761798/
www.flickr.com/photos/b_huggins/244761795/
299 (** RESOLVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/fortphoto/310049586/
300 (** RESOLVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/jorgegavi_o/499706571/
www.flickr.com/photos/jorgegavi_o/499706585/
www.flickr.com/photos/jorgegavi_o/499706579/
301 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/b_huggins/429971725/
302 (** REMOVED **) www.flickr.com/photos/schooksonruss/413132822/
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
303 ** RESOLVED ** (incorrect tags removed)
Great-tailed Grackle tagged as Brewer's Blackbird
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
Trying to identify birds I've never seen again... Can someone clarify with respect to these pesky Glossy Starlings:
304
Can Lesser Blue-eared really have reddish-orange eyes (or is this Bronze-tailed)?
305
Is it OK for Greater Blue-eared to seem not to have dark behind the eye (as in Cape)?
306-307
Is it OK for some Lesser Blue-eared (306) to have thicker dark eye-stripes than some Greater Blue-eared (307)?
306:  ; 307: 
308
Are purple flanks OK for Greater Blue-eared?
They're probably all OK, but would appreciate clarification for my own benefit if nothing else.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I know nothing.
304 - Doesn't seem to have a big enough (or any?) ear-patch for bronze-tailed.
305 - Yes, why not Cape. Tho I'd rather sit and watch it turn its head a few times so that it catches the light differently. Oh yes, it's not going to do that, is it. Bum.
306-308 - No idea.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
309 ** RESOLVED ** (incorrect tag removed)
Most certainly not Garrulus glandarius!
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
310 Misidentified?
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
311-312 ** RESOLVED ** (tags corrected)
Brown-headed Gulls tagged as Black-headed Gulls
 
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
309 - the Spanish name given for this bird is Arrendajo de Alas Amarillas, which is Yellow-winged Cacique, but it doesn't look like the ones we already have in the pool. Arrendajo is also Spanish for Eurasian Jay, hence the confusion with Garrulus glandarius. Would help to know what it actually is before adding a comment to ask for the tags to be fixed (some Spanish might help...) - looks distinctive enough so hopefully it's an easy one...?
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
309
How about this Dave?
www.flickr.com/photos/adrian-afonso/2239912076/
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
: I can help with the Spanish; only I don't kow what I should say... beyond that it's certainly not Garrulus Glandarius (it's completely different than the Arrendajo Común we have around here)
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Silly Luis edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
 |
Tordo (or Turpial) Maicero is usually the common name used for the Gymnomystax - but it should be noted that different spanish-speaking countries use different common names.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Thanks all, Oriole Blackbird it is. I've added a comment (in English) asking for the tag to be removed - hopefully the photographer will understand my English but if nothing happens I'll take you up on your offer, Luis!
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Looks like she has changed all as required already so no need for my services :-)
Anyway, you can use me as Spanish translator should further need arise.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Just a note:
I am sure that most (if not all) of the birds now showing up in the Field Guide from this user: www.flickr.com/photos/dibzai/
are captive. Some are not identified. I think we are allowing captives, if so labeled that is. I don't really think I need locations for the non-identified birds - I just need the time to go through them.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
313
Hooded Crow tagged as Carrion Crow
314
Hooded Crow tagged as Carrion Crow
315 RESOLVED
Southern Gray-headed Sparrow tagged as Gray-headed Sparrow
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
mpgoodey (a group admin) edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
 |
316 ** RESOLVED ** (see below)
Martin, Thalasseus bergii or Sterna bergii?
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
Hi marj
Clement's et al call this Thalasseus bergii gwendolenae.
May have previously been Sterna.
Cheers
Martin.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
According to Avibase at least, the genus changed from Sterna to Thalasseus in the 6th edition, so our indexes which are still using the 2005 update to the 5th edition still have it as Sterna. I'll add the Sterna bergii tag, but the new one won't hurt and will be ready for when we eventually move on to the 6th edition (assuming we do).
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
317 ** REMOVED **
Call me an old cynic but I somehow don't believe this.
I think I deleted it once.
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
317 is in the photographer's "Special Effects" set.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Thanks marj
Out she goes then!
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
318 ** RESOLVED ** (confirmed as Taveta & tags corrected)
This one's down as an African Golden Weaver but is that really possible with such extensive reddish colour (and dark eye, narrow bill)? Taveta? Dunno.
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
No, can't be African golden, can it - and Taveta looks possible - but further than that I wouldn't, myself, go. Taveta has a v restricted range, which might make it unlikely as cagebird, but def doesn't rule it out. And I'd be reluctant to rule out some other species looking like this thru moult/age/geography. Pass.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
318
How about this for a coincidence guys
www.flickr.com/photos/royce10/2191484911/
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
mpgoodey (a group admin) edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
 |
** RESOLVED ** (tags corrected though description still wrong)
Tagged and Titled as Little Kingfisher, Alcedo pusilla but really a Forest Kingfisher
www.flickr.com/photos/chrisnclick/128970205/
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
318:
Def. Taveta. It might have a relatively small range, but it's pretty common in that range, and, based on ISIS records, also common in captivity.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
318 - thanks all.
The Forest Kingfisher's tags are now OK, although the incorrect name remains in the description.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
319
I think this need some confirmation.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
319 - Chiffchaff seems feasible, though I wish it was side-on.
320 ** REMOVED ** (still unresolved)
Southern Masked Weaver, correctly ID'd, incorrectly tagged as Lesser Masked
321 ** REMOVED ** (still unresolved)
Black-headed Weaver, tagged as Lesser Masked
(Both of these were correctly identified some months ago but I've now requested the tags to be corrected)
322-323 ** RESOLVED ** (confirmed as Village Weaver & incorrect tags removed)
Identified as Speke's Weaver but has red eye and black forecrown. I guess it's Village Weaver - am I right?
 
(This is probably the same bird and shows the back)
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
322-323
Spot on Dave. Village Weaver (Ploceus cucullatus bohndorffi)
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
HELLO,
with my limited equipments iam trying to the best i can,ur comments of my photos are highly appreciated, thank u ,lov ashok
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
324 ** RESOLVED ** (rubticata tags removed)
Not sure if we're agreed it's Bar-breasted Firefinch Lagonosticta rufopicta or not, but we certainly seem to be agreed it's not African Firefinch Lagonosticta rubricata as still tagged.
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
324
I think we may have to drop this one Dave. I have just looked through all of his photos and this shot is no longer in his collection.
I'm not quite sure how that is possible and it worries me slightly.
Does that mean if (for what ever reason) I decide to quit from my Flickr account. Any photos I have posted in groups will remain?? I thought if you removed an image from your stream it would disappear from all your groups.
For what it's worth I have seen many Red billed Firefinch both in Gambia and in Tanzania. Adults always show a strong yellow orbital ring, which I'm sure you could see if this bird had one. Also I have never seen one looking quite so vinaceous or with such grey flanks and pale vent. I played with this in ps and you can clearly see it has ashy grey flanks.
EDIT ah ha, the inner workings of Flickr, beyond me I'm afraid. But there in lies the problem unless you want to flickrmail him will he see any request you leave if as a non pro he is limited to the current 200 images??
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
mpgoodey (a group admin) edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
I think you're right that if you remove an image from your photostream it would be removed from any groups it's in automatically. However Chris doesn't have a pro account and yet has >200 photos - my guess is that those older than the last 200 don't show in his photostream but remain in any groups he's posted them to. Not sure about that though - might also be something to do with privacy settings.
Based on what you say I'm happy for it to stay in as Bar-breasted (we don't have all that many) so long as the incorrect tag gets removed.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
The whole photo page is still there - but just not part of his photostream. Flickr moves in mysterious ways...
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Buckeye. edited this topic 9 months ago.
|
|
... will he see any request you leave ....?
He will see it in his "activity" page, and can access the page from there to corect whatever he has to. You just won't find the page while traversing the photostream.
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Ramphastos vitellinus tagged as R. tucanus:
www.flickr.com/photos/pinebird/386228290/
Posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
325 ** REMOVED **
This person has blocked me so I can't tell them that their photo is misidentified. Rufous Hummingbird tagged as Anna's.
www.flickr.com/photos/b_huggins/244761814/
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
326 ** RESOLVED ** (tags corrected)
Willow Warbler tagged as Chiffchaff
Originally posted 9 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
327 ** GONE **
Spanish Black redstart (I guess) no tags, has Spotted Flycatcher in his description. Anyone help with the Spanish please.
Originally posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
To All,
As everyone vetting photos for the Field Guide DB, our time to dedicate to these things is limited.
Personally, I am getting quite fed up with going through the new DB uploads only to find birds with no attempt to identify them or put correct tags on them. I just do not feel like spending time on going through and doing the ID's when the Author of the photos apparently intend uploading them hoping some poor idiot will do them, and this without soliciting elsewhere help for their identification.
I am just going to start eliminating them, and if somebody gets their knickers in a twist, well that is just tough tittie as far as I am concerned.
Any objections?
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Not from me.
I bought a copy of Clements just b/c of this group.
If someone isn't going to make the effort - BIN 'EM!
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Rock on Steve!
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
There are two types of people who habitually don't tag:
1) people who, probably due to language, don't understand the requirements but have some very valuable photos which they contribute to the group
2) people who just post their photos to as many groups as they can without any consideration of the aims of the group let alone its rules.
For the most part people who fit into the second category are contributing photos for which it won't be a great loss if we bin them. I'd be a bit concerned about a blanket removal of photos belonging to the first category. We have a number of Middle Eastern contributors who rarely tag their photos but they contribute some really valuable ones of species that we probably wouldn't easily get without them.
However, nine times out of ten if there's no attempt to identify the bird on the photo page, in any language in the tags, title or description, then chances are they fit into the second category, and I'm quite happy for their photos to be binned.
We don't have Alastair's index for the moment, and along with it the list of untagged photos, so it's even harder to keep track of them.
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
: I'll add a comment in his stream with a link to your post here, should I tell him anything more?
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Hi Dave,
Don't worry about the "necessary" photos, that is, the rare ones that are worth my looking at and possibly not seen before, well, I am generally able to recognise which ones that I need to spend time on. They will not be binned. I am speaking mostly of other stuff that we have seen "ad nauseum".
As far as the languages, I read and speak five languages, do not know Arab, or Chinese, Japanese, etc., but for the most part...
Originally posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
cuckooroller (a group admin) edited this topic 8 months ago.
|
|
What is Clements position on the Red-collared Lorikeet?
Trichoglossus haematodus rubritorquis or T. rubritorquis ?
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Marj,
The Clements does not split this race - still considered, by them, as T. h. rubritorquis (Rainbow Lorikeet).
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
www.flickr.com/photos/bunnhillphoto/2370128532/
Supposedly from South America.
I must say that I am at a loss on this one. This type of caruncly (to coin a probably non-existant term) gape is something that I have most often seen in juvenile african estrildids.
I had half an idea that they were juvenile Agelaioides badius - but I just can't seem to match them up.
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Steve [cuckooroller],
Definitely no South American about that one (unless counting the introductions). I agree 100% with you on juv. Estrilidae, though I'll refrain from trying exclude the various Asian/Australian species.
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I think this
http://www.flickr.com/photos/blindspot2006/242561795/
wrongly tagged as
Centropus sinensis parroti
while Centropus sinensis refers to the Greater Coucal, will be confusing
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
It's probably time to remove 292, 295, 296, and 325.
Posted 8 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
They've gone now!
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
** RESOLVED ** (tags correct though title still wrong)
Ok, I'm thinking this is a House Finch because of the brown streaking. Don't Purple Finches usually show little to know streaking on the flanks?
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
Looks like a house finch to this ignorant Brit...
However, I do know more about moorhens, so perhaps someone could point out to my mate awcmon that this isn't a purple gallinule like his tags say it is. I can't, cos he's banned me :-D
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Buckeye. edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
Yes, House Finch - have added a comment and tags, but as the photo wasn't tagged anyway there are none to remove.
Have removed the Moorhen. Thanks both.
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
** RESOLVED ** (correct tags but caption still incorrect)
www.flickr.com/photos/al-tubaiykh/with/2466812913/
Lesser grey, not great grey.
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
** REMOVED **
www.flickr.com/photos/hhyeo/2494171783/in/pool-birdguide/
Greater not lesser (flamingo). Or are the Caribbean ones split? Many pics of them, some (e.g. that one) not worth keeping.
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
 |
** REMOVED **
Hummingbird just added to pool, unidentified and maybe unidentifiable (at least by me!).
www.flickr.com/photos/environmenttoall/2494383789/in/pool...
** PENDING **
This Wood Stork is mididentified and mistagged as White Ibis:
www.flickr.com/photos/chi-liu/104059308/
** RESOLVED ** (tags corrected)
This is a Tricolored Heron, labeled as a Little Blue Heron (messaged the photographer)
www.flickr.com/photos/pancier/301201902/
Please let me know if you do not want this type of observation in this thread. If you do, since I search the pool fairly often, I would be happy to help with this clearing up somehow.
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
Flamingos - yes, the Caribbean ones are split now. Have removed them anyway as captive flamingos often don't resemble wild examples (too pink due to feed). Some of them weren't suitable anyway. We have plenty of wild Greater Flamingos and some Caribbean too.
Carol, yes please - do let us know when you find errors as we can then make sure they're corrected and remove them if they're not. I've removed the hummingbird as I doubt if it's identifiable, and if it is it's not useful for ID. The Wood Stork is an Australian Ibis, but tags still need correcting as are for White Ibis (confusion due to the english names used I think). I've added a comment asking for the incorrect tag to be removed from that and the Tricolored Heron.
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
Oops on the Ibis! I should have known ... have photographed that species!
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
** REMOVED **
www.flickr.com/photos/george-lessard/16124152/
Obviously a Western Tanager, tagged as a Black-headed Grosbeak. Other photos of the same bird from the same photographer's set have been re-tagged, guess this one slipped through.
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Dave Appleton edited this topic 7 months ago.
|
|
ALL RESOLVED
Little Blue Heron ... Comments were corrected, but tags remain as Tricolored Heron.
www.flickr.com/photos/hhyeo/1883883344/
White Ibis with White-faced Ibis tag
www.flickr.com/photos/cajunlandman/31139875/
In pool as Mottled Duck ... a mallard hybrid. Should be removed.
www.flickr.com/photos/fabrica-imago/89162429/
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
dermoidhome (a group admin) edited this topic 5 months ago.
|
|
Have removed the Tanager as we have plenty. The White Ibis has the correct scientific name tags so will come up correctly in the index, but I've suggested that the photographer removes the incorrect common name tag anyway. Someone's seems to have already removed the Mottled Duck/Mallard hybrid.
It helps to number these by the way, as it's easier to refer to in subsequent comments. Next number = 328...
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
ALL RESOLVED OR REMOVED
328
Should be removed, I should think
www.flickr.com/photos/alexlayzell/2498735201/in/pool-bird...
329
ditto
www.flickr.com/photos/punta1/2499327592/in/pool-birdguide
330
also
www.flickr.com/photos/punta1/2499327242/in/pool-birdguide
and 331
www.flickr.com/photos/10409127@N08/2499464696/in/pool-bir...
332
This one doesn't even have a bird in it! How do you guys put up with this #+!#?
www.flickr.com/photos/10409127@N08/2499464770/in/pool-bir...
333
not tagged and redundant
www.flickr.com/photos/10409127@N08/2499464690/in/pool-bir...
224
334 again no bird
www.flickr.com/photos/10409127@N08/2499464692/in/pool-bir...
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
dermoidhome (a group admin) edited this topic 5 months ago.
|
|
ALL RESOLVED OR REMOVED
335
There are 18 in a row of these that should be removed.
www.flickr.com/photos/26599040@N05/2499307168/in/pool-bir...
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
dermoidhome (a group admin) edited this topic 5 months ago.
|
|
ALL RESOLVED OR REMOVED
335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340
Another no bird and another untagged and a series of not worth much
www.flickr.com/photos/yohanntv/2472686159/in/pool-birdguide
www.flickr.com/photos/yohanntv/2473507922/in/pool-birdguide/
www.flickr.com/photos/yohanntv/2472686557/in/pool-birdguide
www.flickr.com/photos/yohanntv/2472686689/in/pool-birdguide/
www.flickr.com/photos/yohanntv/2473508046/in/pool-birdguide/
www.flickr.com/photos/25614782@N07/2499194868/in/pool-bir...
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
dermoidhome (a group admin) edited this topic 5 months ago.
|
|
Thanks Carol, 328-340 all removed, with the exception of the best one of the Tree Swallow series which I tagged.
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
ALL RESOLVED OR REMOVED
341
Anna's improperly tagged as Archilochus colubris
www.flickr.com/photos/everydaybeautiful/143393841/
I added correct tag; noticed that someone has already left a message to remove incorrect one on the photo.
342
Incorrectly tagged with tyrannustyrannus
343
Not sure what this bird is but not tyrannusmelancholicus
www.flickr.com/photos/56541100@N00/1173516980/
Originally posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
dermoidhome (a group admin) edited this topic 5 months ago.
|
|
I guess 342 relates to this:
Have left messages on this & 343.
Posted 7 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
Field Guide: Birds of the World /
Discuss
