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
Hoopoe starling 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 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
This article was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 21 November 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
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.
I will soon expand this article, but am currently wondering which image would be appropriate for the taxobox. First, there is a drawing which is thought to be the only life drawing of the animal in existence, but it is not coloured. Then we have a photo of a mounted specimen, but where the most conspicuous feature, the crest, is obscured. And lastly we have various paintings of mounted specimens. In theory, I think the first two would be most appropriate and "accurate", but not as presentable. Any thoughts? FunkMonk (talk) 14:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would go with the life drawing in the taxobox, and sprinkle photos of the mounted specimens throughout the article.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:06, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Life drawing from c. 1770
This is the life drawing, by the way. And we only have one photo of a mounted specimen, but plenty of paintings... Hume 2014 suggests that this[1] drawing is simply based on the one here, but I'm not so sure. But my opinion is irrelevant, of course... The two are some of the few images that show a "correct" up and forward directed crest, whereas those of the mounts have been posed in many different, often erroneous, ways. FunkMonk (talk) 22:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We should still go with the life drawing. The Hume-recommended picture looks too idealized.--Mr Fink (talk) 23:29, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A much better photo of specimens was uploaded to Commons in 2017, which I have now added to the taxobox. There are some problems with the source info, which I hope will be sorted out... FunkMonk (talk) 10:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
