Talk:Yellow-billed magpie

Birds Low‑importance

Yellow-billed magpie 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

Low

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

WikiProject Birds To-do:

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.

Korean Magpie

The commentary about the Korean Magpie seems to already be handled in the Korean Magpie article. The presentation of it seems to wander close to WP:NOR too. Since it seems to me that whether or not the Korean Magpie might or might nor be a separate species from the European Magpie seems pretty distantly related to the subject at hand, and since the issue is already covered in a more appropriate article, any objections to me removing the paragraph? -- Cjensen 03:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I object. The source of the information is Madge and Burn,Crows and Jays (ISBN 0-7136-3999-7), which is hardly original research, and I would have though thought that the relationships with other very similar forms were very relevant, especially as some of these forms are, or were in the recent past, considered conspecific. Removing the paragraph takes away usefull information and adds nothing. jimfbleak 07:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The more general Magpie has a paragraph which appears to mean the same thing, but is easy to read and makes the real issue more clear -- though it too lacks a cite. Could we copy that in instead? -- Cjensen 09:39, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that bit does appear to be cited in fact. jimfbleak 10:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A rather glaring omission noted and an important question

Shouldn't there be SOME mention of the species's animated stars, Heckle & Jeckle? And on a more serious note--not that that first point was a culturally unserious one, mind you!--I've also heard that magpies are one of but a handful of species who can recognize their mirror images as being themselves, along with humans (duh), great apes, dolphins and maybe one other species. Can anyone shed some light on this question? [SIGNED] FLORIDA BRYAN

Wiki Education assignment: California Natural History

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2023 and 1 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jhan00100 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by BombusBear (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]