Jump to content

Category talk:Birds

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I have been putting major cat articles of birds in both their taxo cat and cat:birds to make them easier to find. I have also linked common name subcats to main cat:birds to enable easy finding. This is not perfect and I am open for suggestions/criticism. --DanielCD 17:33, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps a special category like Cat:Scientific clasiffication cats? --DanielCD 17:36, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Bird is a group in therapod!

[edit]

Please add the category of "therapod" and "dinosaur".222.225.110.213 08:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birds are not dinosaurs and should not be categorized under them. βcommand 19:32, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are English words, which have meanings government by common usage, not claudistic analysis. In common English usage dinosaur refers to a class of animals that all went extint millions of years before the first humans came to be. THis is how my Physical anthopology professor used the term in arguing that dionsaurs and humans never coexisted. Here [1] states dinosaurs died out 65 million years before the first humans existed. Here [2] is another firm no to dinosaurs and humans ever coexisting. I could cite lots and lots and lots and lots more sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • We even have articles with titles like this [3] which clearly treat bird as a group distinct from dinosaur even in a source that heavily discusses their relationship.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:03, 22 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]
  • None of the three sources mentioned are useful: #1 is an example of the USGS being drawn into a theological argument, #2 the headline of the article in Discovery Magazine is belied in the first paragraph, #3 the headline in the article from Smithsonian Magazine is belied in the second paragraph. Reading at least two paragraphs from any source should be a requirement; headlines are never reliable sources. — Neonorange (Phil) 21:18, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
CFD consensus

Living dinosaurs

[edit]
Category 'Birds' (bottom), Category 'Dinosaurs' (top)

I added Category:Living dinosaurs and was good faith reverted by Fayenatic london who pointed out a discussion in which 'Dinosaurs' was removed as a category and thus category Birds is buried nine (9) categories down from 'Dinosaur' (buried deeper than the deepest non-avian dinosaur fossils) even though they constitute well over 10,000 living species. But if anything is normal in this topsy-turvy world of dinosaurs literally surrounding us in air and tree it is that category 'Birds' should be listed in Category:Living dinosaurs, as they are the only living dinosaurs. So rather then digging nine categories deep to find them, here is an almost unarguable category that they should belong in. They are dinosaurs, and they are living. If they don't belong here then the name of that category should be changed. Those seem to be the only options here. Maybe 'Dinosaurs in pseudoscience', or 'Living dinosaurs excluding birds', or another choice to politely hide the birds from that category too (another way to say "Nine categories down", need a Oceans 11 hole-digger to find them). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 16:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fayenatic london, should I add Category:Living dinosaurs back? With that name the category seems best and most accurately represented by Category:Birds, aside from someone writing a category descriptor which limits it. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:48, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have added back category:Living dinosaurs, per category name and talk page silent consensus. Birds are dinosaurs, and they are alive. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]