Talk:Field guide

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Birds Low‑importance

Field guide 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

edit
history
watch
purge

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reference works (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

Untitled[edit]

David Sibley did not "set new standards", but followed the likes of Hayman et al, Svensson, Johnsson and Killian Mullarney. His text is very poor. jimfbleak 05:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paintings vs. Photos[edit]

Hi everyone. I have read somewhere that it is better to use painted pictures when identifying birds, because photos often have lighting problems and don't record all of the different plumages. What is your take on this? Any advice? Thanks. ɸSwannieɸ 02:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you have said is definitely the case. All serious field guides and bird family monographs use paintings. Photographs can be beautiful, but are not usually as practical as paintings. jimfbleak 05:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic field guides with photos can be useful if they include close-up photos of all distinctive and salient features. (Hbreder 15:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I ask birdies about this and they are split, each do things the other cannot. cygnis insignis 19:52, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Handbooks vs, field guides[edit]

There is an article on Ornithological handbook I just found, very short, but I already had the idea that 'handbooks' had come to mean more than an identification key and succinct description that is supposed to be portable, pocket-sized, held in one hand? While handbook also suggests that less exhaustive approach, they are a step up in size and content for use as a desk reference (and less commonly owned). The two Australian books I just annotated at that article are examples of this, note that HANZAB is a multivolume work (I wish I owned). cygnis insignis 19:52, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]