Talk:Muscovy duck

Muscovy Duck's Dark Side

The Muscovy Duck breeds in urban and suburban lakes and on farms throughout Florida. Apparently, no pair bond is established, at least among domesticated Muscovy Ducks. Matings are promiscuous and a form of rape, where the male overpowers the female. They nest in tree cavities or on the ground. In suburban and urban areas, they nest under shrubs in yards or on condominium balconies or under roof overhangs. It is said that each adult duck produces about 1/3-pound of dung per day. They have been known to mate with wild Mallard Ducks, creating another nuisance.

In many places, these large, ungainly birds are considered pests due to aggressive panhandling and because they defecate in swimming pools and on patios and docks. They feed on aquatic plants, grasses, seeds, insects, and on human handouts, such as bread.

In Florida they are now considered "invasive". They are protected in Florida by Statute 828.12, which makes shooting or hurting them in anyway punishable by law. Suggested means to curtail them within the law 1) Stop feeding them 2) Repel and harass with low noises or by chasing 3) Control flock size by locating nests and vigorously shaking eggs to render inviable. Return eggs to nest so hen won't renest. Sfpc 12:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed the text reposted above by user:sfpc from the article for the following reasons

Three problems.

1. The clutch size and incubation time already occurs earlier in the article. If you disagree with the figures, change them, don't just add a contradictory section
2. talk of promiscuity and rape is very POV, imposing human values on a bird which acts from instinct and is incapable of making moral judgments.
3. The bit on Florida is rather parochial for a species with such a large range, but my main concern with that section is that putting in suggestions is non-enc. I suppose that it could be reinstated if rephrased eg "legal methods of control include..."

Hope this help - the whole article needs a good tidy really. jimfbleak 05:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

My feelings about above -

I live in Florida and have lived with these ducks for quite a while. Like any invasive species to the state, being plant or animal, they should be controlled. I know that currently my neighbors are fighting over whether they should go or stay. My one and only fear is that the population explosion is causing a health hazard for the children. My entries were only added to the article to supply more information about this duck. I would hope that user:jimfbleak would correct any problems with these entries instead of using the tactic of "reverting"! Sfpc 12:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll do a tidy and partial restore, but not just at the moment - got to mow the lawn in a few minutes.

jimfbleak 13:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Done now. jimfbleak 05:42, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you user:jimfbleak for taking the time to update and format the Muscovy Duck entry to reflect the status of this duck in Florida. Sfpc 20:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I also live in Florida on a small pond where unfortunately people want everything to be manicured. So this includes "trapping" and removing the muscovy ducks. Much of their fear is based on all the diseases they supposedly carry. Guess what, it's hogwash. Don't believe me check out this link. http://www.duckhaven.org/page9.html

Would somebody mind checking out the bit about "Sir Hugo of Trumpington" in this article? I was not sure about the sentence previous to that one, and therefore haven't done the cutting myself.

I am a new person to the sight and would think that I would learn something form it, that was my intention. However, I feel the responsibility for adding to the information that you have posted. We are talking about anamils here, and not ones that are endangered. I live in south Texas and there is not an abundance of Muskovy ducks here. Therefore, I do not have the problems that thoes persons in Florida have. Probably the oposit. I had to hunt through many places in this state before I found a place where I could purchase my Muscovis. I did find a man near me that had Muscovi ducks but didn't know what they were. From the first 4 that I got, two males and two females I have had as many as 35 ducks in my pen at one time. Because I have them in a controled environment, I can observe them quite closely. Please read and correct if you think my findings are not correct. There is one male that is dominent. He controls all the other males. Though he is the dominent male, one female is the leader of the clutch. She will be the first one to leave the pen to explore the yard, to enter the garden, to find the bugs near the roots of the plants. When she returns to the pen, all others follow. Taken from what was written earlier, "They feed on aquatic plants, grasses, seeds, insects, and on human handouts, such as bread." My ducks are deprived of aquatic plants, but they do eat the seeds of the grass, prefering to eat only the tender parts of Bermuda grass. They scroung heartly for bugs, mostly sow bugs, near the roots of the grass. They love dryrott wood and will eliminate it completely if they have the access to it. They are drawn to styrofome and will eliminate it in a short time. I was very worrried when I saw this occuring but had no way to stop it and observed that they did not become ill and were quite well after word. The ducks reach maturity in 6 months, atleast the male do and if you provide them with dog food, will reach a 8 to 10lbs by this time, females from 6 to 8 lbs. I have found that they are intelegent enough to learn routines. Time for feeding for sure but they know when I carry vegitable parts to throw in their pen after supper. In the pen, they hide their eggs even though the pen is small and it is comon to see two hens in the same nest at the same time laying eggs together.

That's interesting. I didn't know they loved dryrot wood so much. Is it because bugs burrow in it, do you think? These ducks can get pretty vicious though, so be careful. When I was a child, I was holding a roll (bread) in my hand and one duck flew up and snatched it, biting part of my nail off in the process. What's worse is my grandma used iodine to clean me up afterward. Oh, and remember to end your messages on discussions with four tildas ("~"). This puts your signature at the end of your post. Cyborg Ninja 06:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The clock is ticking - when will the Muscovy duck cross the line from being just a duck to a full blown nuance! Currently the ducks in my area have become nothing but panhandlers, waddling through the neighborhood looking for birdfeeders to live off of. They have given up using their natural desire for food they are suppose to be eating. It is only a matter of time before they become nothing more than a domestic farm animal and then all of the things written in the main article will be a laugh. I live with them everyday, observing their demise first hand! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sfpc (talk • contribs) 03:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC).

Humane feral duck population management

I don't think this section (which mainly seems to be a set of instructions) has any place in this article at all. Any thoughts? CiaranG 20:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

From what I have read, the best bet is to locate a nest prior to a hen sitting. The eggs can be vigorously shaken, marked and returned to the nest at this time without any suffering to an embryo. If eggs are shaken once a hen has begun to sit, this may result in deformed ducklings. Sudden removal of a nest will just permit the hen to begin the mating and laying cycle that much sooner. She will then lay in a different location.mrvax 23:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

It is possible to remove the eggs from the nest and replace them with plastic Easter eggs or even light bulbs to satisfy the female's brooding instincts and avoid a new mating cycle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.41.109 (talk) 06:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

grooming?

Does anyone know if these ducks (or if all ducks) groom each other? A little gang of these guys live in a pond right in front of my apartment. Often I watch one of them sort of sit on top of another in the water and peck at him/her. It almost looks like murder (the first time I saw it, I ran outside to watch).. but the other duck eventually comes back up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ryan Heuser (talk • contribs) 19:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

I have never seen what you described, but, if it helps, the first two Muscovy ducks I ever saw in my life (two males, perhaps brothers), who lived in the park, would sometimes groom each another. However, this occurred peacefully and on land. 62.194.121.100 12:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

The 1st comment above about "them sort of sit on top of another in the water and peck at him/her.", probably refers to them mating. The ducks I have observed groom themselves and take frequent baths.mrvax 23:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Another explanation for one Muscovy sitting on another is "pecking order." I own Muscovys and they are females. I observe this behavior daily. I have speculated that they are mimicking mating behavior as well. Both could be true as in many animal groups mating activity is used to establish dominance. As far as grooming, like some other bird species my Muscovys do groom each other. They groom each other less than some, but more than other bird species. Some (but not all) of the grooming behavior appears to establish dominance. Victorcoutin 10:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Muscovy Ducks in my pen in south Texas

Because my ducks are in a pened up environment, I believe I can observe them closer then most people can or do. In my last entry to this sight, I told about the pecking order of the Muscovies that I have. My Alfa male does not fly, he is too big. The females can fly and do leave the pen only to get me into trouble with my neighbors. The beta duck has learned to traverse the fence so that he is with the females but because of the chainlink fence, will not mate in view of the alfa. Yet if he is behind a solid object that alfa can not see him, he will.

When there was a change in the flock, I gave several of my ducks to a friend that had a pond, I noticed that the females were in a disturbed state and I hung around to watch the event. This next part took almost a whole day and I think it probably went on into the next day also. One female was chasing another, not a fast chase, with plenty of feather pulling and emitting a "bonk" kind of sound from deep in her throat. I could see no movement of the neck or area of the head. The sound was very clear, like you would tap on a drum. This female became the new leader of the flock. She also became a big problem because she could fly and led all the females that could fly into the neighbors yards.

One of the females built a nest in an empty box on my porch. I did not want this duck on my porch so I removed the duck from the nest, collected 6 eggs and took the box out to the pen so that she could nest there. The nest 4 days, she was back on my porch looking for her nest. She would leave the porch only to return a little while later looking again for the nest. I enjoy the ducks but realize that I do not know enough about their life cycle to be able to tell you more. 1/24/07 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.132.16.26 (talk) 02:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

As far as mating habits go, I agree that each area has an alpha male. I live on a lake in Orlando Florida. Sometimes another male will stop by and challenge the alpha male to fight. I often see the alpha interrupt one of "his" hens while mating with another duck. At other times, the alpha male will standby vocalizing but not chasing the "new" male away. I really haven't seen any hen behavior consistant with an "alpha female".

One time a particular female that was laying and just about ready to sit, was mating several times a day. During one mating spree, I witnessed another female duck I believe to be her sister, mount the hen after the males were done with her. I was very surprised to see that.

I see something unusual almost every day watching these Muscovys interact. I have grown quite fond of them however, I am concerned that the population may get to be a problem where I live.mrvax 23:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Vocalizations

Has anyone ever done a vocal range test of the Muscovy Duck? This Duck is relatively quiet for a duck. When you observe Muscovy Ducks they look like they vocolize more than you can hear.

Caruncle edit

I reverted some edits; Caruncle is the correct word, not carbuncle. Most ducks do not quack, and I don't know offhand of any male duck that does, quacking being restricted largely to female dabbling ducks. jimfbleak 08:44, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And I also went ahead and fixed this messy discussion page. Cyborg Ninja 05:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Origin of name

Does anyone know how a south american duck got named after Moscow? I came here looking for that bit of etymology and didn't find it. (I found one source that claims it's a corruption of "musk duck")

The entry for turkey says:

"The names for the domesticated Turkey in other languages also frequently reflect its exotic origins, seen from an Old World viewpoint, and confusion about where it actually comes from. The many references to India seen in common names go back to a combination of two factors: first, the genuine belief that the newly-discovered Americas were in fact a part of East Asia, and second, the tendency to attribute exotic produce to some particular place that at that time symbolized far-off, exotic lands. The latter is reflected in terms like "Muscovy Duck" (which is from South America, not Muscovy) and indeed was a major reason why the name "turkey-cock" was transferred to Meleagris species." - 74.69.227.16 19:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Professor Lee Gass (U. British Columbia, Zoology, humming birds, retired) suggested to me in a private conversation that the word "muscovy" is derived from the latin "musca" for fly because of their ability to draw flies by scent, in order to eat the flies. The latter is a characteristic I noticed in them. 76.194.67.204 (talk) 15:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Prof. Gass' opinion. Perhaps ten years ago on a visit to UBC, I told Prof. Gass about the muscovy's ability to draw flies by their emission of a scent that is very attractive to flies. It was at that time that Prof. Gass first speculated that was why they are named muscovy after “musca”, fly. I observed the phenomenon in the muscovy ducks I had kept kept. They are capable of attracting many hundreds of flies by emitting the scent. The scent is not discernable to humans. At least some breeds of mallard derived ducks are capable of emitting the scent as well. The flies congregate on the bushes downwind from the ducks. They only emit the scent when they are hungry or thirsty, not otherwise. ♪♫~~☼~~♫♪ My Flatley (talk) 00:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

---

I have owned Muscovys for several years now. I have done lots of research on the species. I am not an ornithologist. The "Musk Duck" explanation is very common. It can be found pretty much everywhere. It seems to be an old wives tale. The The Domestic Waterfowl Club of Great Britain article on Muscovy Ducks tells how the "musk" gland of this species was used in 19th century patent medicine. Muscovys don't have a musk gland. They do have a prominent oil gland at the base of their tail though. The ducks have no musky oder. This might be another possible explanation for the term "Musk Duck," but most of the research I've seen predates the name "Muscovy." Additionally, it's not easy to agree that "Musk Duck" corrupted to "Muscovy" in the short span between the 19th and 20th centuries. As well, documentation shows the name Muscovy predated the 19th century, as far back as the 16th century. Additionally since the ducks don't have musk, the term Mask Duck seems much more logical, because of the mask like appearance of the species' caruncles.

Among duck owners, a much more plausible explanation is paraphrased in David Holderread's Storey's Guide to Raising Ducks 2001, pp 73-74. I will line out the basic points of the explanation:

• Muscovys were domesticated in the New World when Columbus arrived (most likely for centuries).
  
• Muscovys have been in Europe at least since the 1500s.
• The Muscovite Company or (Muscovy Company) was a very prominent shipping company during that time in history (similar to the East India Company) which transported the ducks to Europe.
• It was common practice to attach the importer's name to the products they sold. Thus, in 1550 the ducks would have been called Muscovite Ducks or Muscovy Ducks.
• Over the years, Muscovy became more common than Muscovite.

--Victorcoutin 17:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The above reference to "Sir Hugo of Trumpington" (not in this section, but at the first part of this "talk" category) has been cited in several other places that I've seen. The coat of arms of Trumpington supposedly contains (or once contained) an image of a Muscovy duck. My above reference to the Muscovy Company being responsible for the importation of the species ties into this. I have seen references to the Trumpingtons being involved with the Muscovy Company, which could explain the inclusion of a Muscovy duck on their coat of arms. I don't as yet have the documentation at hand to verifiably determine this.--Victorcoutin 18:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

i don't know if this matters or if this is even the right page for this but has anyone ever heard of muskovy ducks being called "dry land ducks" because that is pretty much the default name for them here in eastern ky, it's proly just a hillbilly thing but i thought it might be worth mentioning, i'm not sure about the origins of the name but i think it refers to a "dry land duck" habit of hanging out at the barn waiting to be fed rather than swimming in the creeks looking for their own food 208.157.10.33 (talk) 20:26, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well. I've read a lot about Muscovy ducks and I haven't ever read of the term "dry land duck." What you say makes sense, and perhaps it stands to reason. I can see why they'd get that name certainly. Muscovys in captivity don't really require water (except for preening purposes). Muscovys apparently are known to be less aquatic than Mallards, and Mallard derived strains. They are said to have a less productive oil gland, and their feet (although webbed) have more developed claws that enable them to perch on trees. So the name "dry land duck" seems logical. They are sometimes categorized (taxonomically) with tree ducks, as well, so I wouldn't be surprised to read somewhere that they're known to some localities as "tree ducks." --VictorC (talk) 22:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Odd mother behavior

Not having observed closely other duck species I find the behavior of a particular mother Muscovy duck quite unexpected. This hen currently has 10 of 15 chicks still left that are 18 days old. I have seen the mother fly away and leave the chicks for up to 15 minutes to socialize with other ducks. When she is with the clutch and decides to walk to someplace else, she does not bother to see if all the chicks are following. I see the chicks split away from the main group, often without their mother. I have also observed the chicks take off on their own from the main group to go where they want to. I have seen the mother duck participate in forced mating and also what appears to be willing mating while in the presence of her chicks.mrvax 00:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

How the ducks relate to the chicks

Seagulls, coots and mallards do not seem to bother the Muscovy chicks at all. I have seen them pecked at - sometimes very hard by other Muscovys. When I do see a female or male duck peck a chick, it always occurs during feeding or near a feeding area. The female ducks will peck a chick lightly until the female is chased away by the mother. I have never seen an older male Muscovy give anything more than a nudge to a chick. A young male Muscovy (5 months old) has pecked/bit the chicks quite hard and almost seems jealous of them. I observed an older male chase this juvenile away when he was about to disturb the chicks.mrvax 00:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Area they reside

Two problems with the first paragraph of this article. It says they have "occurred" as far North as Tennessee and Arkansas. Firstly, to say they 'occurred' makes it sound like they are some freak accident or experiment rather than a species. Secondly, I live in Virginia Beach and my neighborhood lake is packed full of these birds. Last time I checked, Virginia Beach is farther north than Tennessee and Arkansas.

I noticed this too. I also notice that muscovies tend to get hit by cars a lot in virginia beach.

Addition

I live in southeastern Kentucky and a group of Muscovy ducks arrived on our property last spring and are content being around us. They will eat cracked corn out of my hand and allowed a cat to lay next to the nest when a female was sitting on eggs. Shepherdwolf (talk) 18:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Runty,_my_little_Muscovy_Duckling.JPG may be deleted

I have tagged File:Runty,_my_little_Muscovy_Duckling.JPG, which is in use in this article for deletion because it does not have a copyright tag. If a copyright tag is not added within seven days the image will be deleted. --Chris 09:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

IUCN Status

This species has an IUCN status of LC (least concern) and I am changing this (again) in the entry to reflect this fact that is cited within the article.

From the IUCN: "This species has an extremely large range, and hence does not approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the range size criterion. . . . Despite the fact that the population trend appears to be decreasing, the decline is not believed to be sufficiently rapid to approach the thresholds for Vulnerable under the population trend criterion." Cobun (talk) 04:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

As Weed Control Solution

I observed that Muscovy Ducks also eat watermeal off our pond. That was the reason we got our fledglings. The ducks are a great option in keeping the water and area clean. We are hopeful that by next Spring our pond will have no or at least very little watermeal. SAUMulerider (talk) 16:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Updating Legal issues

The reference to the coming illegality of Muscovies came and was hotly disliked by Muscovy breeders/raisers. Then it was reformed. It seems somehow the experts at US fish and wildlife failed to realize that Muscovies are a popular domesticated breed of duck. How, I don't know. They revised the law to allow people to own Muscovies for food, but not as pets or for hunting, and they cannot be given away for free. Any edit I have ever made to wikipedia has been instantly reverted, so someone with an account needs to do it. 72.178.101.102 (talk) 10:52, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

16 USC §§703, 707 & 50 CFR §21.54(c) make it a federal crime to keep a muscovy duck for personal use. You can only donate them to public museums or public institutions for scientific or educational purposes, or you can bury or incinerate them. [1]50 CFR § 21.54 - Control order for muscovy ducks in the United States Phil (talk) 00:29, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Graniteville Ducks

https://www.facebook.com/groups/GranitevilleDucks1/

Wingman1 18:02, 1 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Taxonomy

The Domestic Muscovy should also actually be Cairina sylvestris moschata. Because when first described by Linneaus, he only described the domestic counterpart not the wild. The wild variant was described later as Cairina sylvestris.

Like other creatures compare dog to wolf or domestic goat to wild goat. You could see that the domestic counterpart is a subspecies of the wild counterpart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.105.47 (talk) 09:32, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Lead image

Why change it. It represents the most common type of muscovy duck better than the pic of a wild type. With the wild type all ready shown in the page. Wingman1 18:48, 10 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Admittedly not knowing much about the Muscovy duck, I see more pictures of white-headed ducks (like your image) than black-headed ducks (like the current lead image) in the body of the article, although both are present. So I assume that both types are already shown in the page. A2soup (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

We can choose a domestic type Muscovy photo if people prefer, but the previous photo was just too low quality in general. Grainy and with washed out lighting. Commons has a ton of great photos we can choose from. Steven Walling • talk 21:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd just agree with Wingman1 that the previous image (quality aside) was more representative of muscovy duck, as it is mostly domesticated. Materialscientist (talk) 21:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps we can move the "Piebald drake" image from the domestication section to the lead, replace it with Wingman1's image, and put the current lead in the etymology, taxonomy and systematics section or the gallery? A2soup (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

A2soup has a great idea. I can support this as a comprise. Wingman1 23:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Okay sorry for the late late reply, but I agree that is a good compromise, @Wingman1: and @A2soup: Steven Walling • talk 04:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I guess my buddy Flash has had a good run, now I got to go take care of a one of his sons. (leg cought in fishing line- grr ) thanks for making the switch for me. @Steven Walling: Wingman1 16:59, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

I am kinda put out that it was changed without this discussion FIRST set aside that I took the photo , I feel it should be reverted untill discussion is complete. Wingman1 23:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

As for image quality I disagree . But I am not a pro. Wingman1 23:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

The lead image is still of rather poor quality. Can a replacement be chosen from commons:Category:Quality images of cairina moschata? --Trougnouf (talk) 07:45, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

@Wingman1: In general, I'm in favor of showing the wild version in an article about a species, especially when that wild version is a common and widely distributed species in part of the world. That said, there are currently no images of wild birds in here. Ideally there should be enough to inform people who live in or visit the area where these occur in the wild. Also please give a reason whenever reverting anything other than vandalism. Thank you. —innotata 23:27, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

@Innotata:

These are 4 wild types, but have been crossed with the domestic types, the "pure' "wild"types are not that widely distributed around the world. Wingman1 23:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Um they're widespread from just S of the US to N Argentina. —innotata 17:30, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

lets revisit thisWingman1 22:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Trumpeter Swan which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:45, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Muscovy Ducks as pets?

Nothing on the page touches on this. Wingman1 18:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Merge Domestic muscovy duck here

Is there any compelling reason why that stub needs to be separate? Even if it wasn't a stub, we usually don't keep subspecies separate. FunkMonk (talk) 16:10, 29 June 2018 (UTC) That page is really not even needed at this point. They is ton's of data and sources about Domestic/pet Muscovy ducks i say merge it with this page, then add to this here. Wingman1 22:13, 29 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Wattle/caruncle

Wingman1 - because I have minimal faith that you will actually be able to restrain yourself from reverting this until the cows come home - could you please demonstrate how "caruncle" (4800 Google hits) is a more commonly used term in connection with Muscovy ducks than "wattle" (20400 Google hits)? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

They mean the same, but as some one who has raised them for years, let me break it down for you "Caruncle" = Muscovy Duck, "Wattle" = Chicken and "Snood" = Turkey.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Caruncle_(bird_anatomy) https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wattle_(anatomy) https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Snood_(anatomy)

https://www.backyardchickens.com/threads/why-do-muscovies-have-those-caruncles.364115/

https://animals.mom.me/tell-difference-male-female-muscovy-ducks-7364.html Wingman1 23:20, 21 November 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wingman1 (talk • contribs)

Well, common usage doesn't seem to follow that, so... --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

As the caruncle article notes, wattles are often defined as a type of caruncle. —innotata 17:31, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Etymology

...and it really hasn't occurred to anyone that the nonsensical "Muscovy" part just might be a misinterpretation of "musk", as explained in the entire second subsection of the etymology section? Do the speculations about Muisca and whatnot really need to be in this article? David Marjanović (talk) 21:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

external links modified

Just added a link to educational article with a video about Muscovy Duck. I think would be very interesting for kids (video) and adults

Images for use

Hello, I like to take photos of animals as a hobby, and I have a couple photos you are welcome to use that I believe are a Domestic Muscovy Duck. I did not want to insert them in the article myself because I do not know much about ducks, but I will leave them here if anybody would like to use them. Here are a couple, and I may add some more later (I'll post them here too.)

Spongeworthy93 (talk) 22:36, 4 August 2022 (UTC)

Impossible dilutions

@ජපස: Not that this is of great importance, but this is an encyclopedia, and we do not deal in false absolutes. No, I don't "trust you" in this regard, because you are wrong :) An extremely high dilution does not mean that the diluted substance magically disappears at some point; it just becomes less and less probable that any given random sample of the dilution will contain any part of the original. Extremely improbable is not impossible, and the statement "the solution does not contain any muscovy duck liver" (or whatever) may be approximately (and practically) correct, but it is strictly wrong. Since the current formulation really does not create any false implications, I do not see a good reason for replacing it with one that does? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Extremely improbable is impossible to the extent that anything is impossible in the material world. The alternative position is to say that impossible as a word needs to be excised from the encyclopedia. You are out of your depth and are pushing an interpretation that is absurd.

If you want to prove yourself, show the calculation as to how many instances of our universe you would need to get one molecule. I'll wait.

jps (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Since you have seen fit to split this discussion, see my response at that noticeboard. BTW, "my depth" is publishing a dozen papers in which the conflation of "extremely improbable" and "does not occur" would have gotten me a peer review rejection. I wonder how you managed to get away with that in a STEM field? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

This, BTW, is slightly more defensible, if still strictly wrong - "statistically" there will be one molecule in every xth sample, where x depends on sample size and is very large. What you mean is "for practical purposes". --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

You're out of your depth. You compared to dissolving this in the Pacific Ocean which is 354 orders of magnitude off. This is how ridiculous your argument is. It's truly wacky in the realm of straightforward calculation. jps (talk) 11:09, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

If I hear "you are out of your depth" once more from someone who cannot grasp that "very small" is not "zero", I may have to start inserting the term "inflated clown" into the conversation; therefore, let us stop this here. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:52, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, but as someone who uses numbers like these (normally much larger) but still calls them zero in reliable sources, I am aghast that you can argue with a straight face that there is a difference between a concentration of 10^-400 and an absence of all solute. That's what you have argued. It's absurd. jps (talk) 12:55, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I've brought up this edit war to the Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Muscovy_duck. I have a really hard time gritting my teeth through this. It's hard to think of something more absurd than someone wanting to hold out hope for Muscovy duck molecules in oscillococcinum. jps (talk) 02:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

The probability of finding sources that call BS BS is infinitely higher than that of finding a "duck molecule" in Oscillococcinum. For the next time, I beseech jps by the liver of Cairina moschata to invest a split second to search for such a source. As a rule, when we're smart, chances are high that the community of publishing scholars has been equally smart before ;) –Austronesier (talk) 08:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, in conformance to our credo of "verifiability not truth" I guess I will have to let that stand. It's a reasonable source; but what is principally demonstrated here is that even good sources may misuse statistical phrasing. Also disappointed in jps for slamming in another revert while the discussion is ongoing, based on "I am right". My respect for several self-appointed fringe-battlers with a chip on their shoulder and a willingness to be bombastic rather than correct in the interest of The Cause is eroding. -Elmidae (talk · contribs) 09:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Offit actually brings in more nuance than visible in my initial quote. We might change the wikitext accordingly, or better just throw the entire soup down the drain, as suggested below. –Austronesier (talk) 11:23, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

• Unrelatedly to this but re domestic Muscovy duck, it may be worth launching another attempt to merge Domestic Muscovy duck into this article. A previous suggestion (see further up on page) did not get any responses, but I think it's a reasonable idea. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:30, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
• Even if anything remained, it would not be to an extent where it could have any effect. If anything, it would be from the added products or hydration alone. But the solution (pun intended) is even simpler: it's just undue material for an article about a duck. There's no mention of soup, why would scam-soup be relevant? Can most people reading the article be expected to have reached it because they were sold nonsense about it? —PaleoNeonate – 04:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Agree. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

• I'm with PaleoNeonate here. It's the typical tail-wagging-the-dog material (or "Baby Yoda drank bone broth in The Mandalorian"-material). How many RS about Muscovy duck mention that they're used as raw material (only to be entirely thrown out to the last molecule in the production process) for Oscillococcinum? If there aren't, we should asap remove this unpaid ad for quack (pun intended) remedies. Or alternatively add some duck soup recipes. –Austronesier (talk) 08:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

I am totally in favor of excising all mention of Oscillococcinum per WP:ONEWAY. jps (talk) 11:43, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Yup, throw it out; not relevant to the article topic. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 11:54, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Done. jps (talk) 12:55, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've started a discussion over at Talk:Domestic_Muscovy_duck#Oscillococcinum about the removal idea. Glad to see consensus that mentioning such things is really weird. It wasn't always thus at WP. jps (talk) 12:59, 19 November 2023 (UTC)