Talk:Common grackle

Why is the G capitalized? 209.77.205.2 00:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

There is an agreed convention that bird species are always capitalised on Wikipedia. One capitalisation, referring to the grackles in general was incorrect. Jimfbleak 05:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

1) After reviewing images of several subspecies, it is my belief that the grackles in Austin are more likely Great-tailed Grackles, rather than Common Grackles.

2) The link cited as a reference for the Austin nuisance entry is a Time article which is questionable as a scholarly source.

Can anyone confirm the species in question, and shouldn't the final line in the "Common Grackle" section be omitted for bias? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fraktol (talk • contribs) 10:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

In the photo gallery, there is a picture entitled "Bronzed Grackle". Is it a subspecies of the Common Grackle or just another name for the same bird? There's no mention of the Bronzed Grackle whatsoever in the article. --Pablo.ea.92 (talk) 22:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

      The Bronzed grackle is a recognized subspecies, Q. q. versicolor.   2603:7000:8100:3600:A806:206D:4CD0:DFC0 (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Summary: I'm removing any claim of a species-specific name for a group of grackles.

There was a claim in this article from 2009 to May 2018 that a group of grackles was called a plague, or more recently, that "Grackles tend to congregate in large groups, popularly referred to as a plague or annoyance", with a request for citation since April 2016. Per the original claim, the only evidence I could find for a "plague of grackles" was a user's post in a forum in 2004 musing on how it would be a good name, particularly a "black plague", the discussion of a 2005 blogspot post (http://williambob.blogspot.com/2005/01/murder-of-grackles.html) in which someone quoted Wikipedia as declaring that "A group of grackles is called a plague" (the date of the comment isn't made explicitly clear, but the blog post was from 2005), and a 2010 facebook post by an account named "birdaday" that claimed the same without attribution. I was unable to find the January 2005 quotation in the Wikipedia history of the page in that era, but it did appear as a one-sentence, referenceless, anonymous contribution in 2009, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Common_grackle&diff=323024226&oldid=321675876. The claim was expanded on, and in 2013 Wikipedia editor Cuffsofas added without citation that a group is "popularly referred to as a plague or annoyance." (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Common_grackle&diff=581111393&oldid=576612535). Google turns up several occurences of this Wikipedia claim being directly quoted. In May 2018, an anonymous editor changed the group name "racket", removed the citation request, and cited a single source, https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/eight-reasons-grackles-are-awesome/ , which has a single occurrence of the word: "What’s more Texas than a hearty symphony of grackle racket? These birds can sound like everything from a squeaky door hinge to explosions of static from a radio left on at high volume to laughing whistles to monkey-like rattles." I think they were using the term "racket" in the conventional sense, meaning noise, and "grackle racket" is meant as the loud noise they make. There are similar conventional uses of "plague" in reference to groups of grackles, as people might refer to a plague of any species, when a lot of of the species come to an area and wreak havoc. There are also occurrences of people saying they are annoyed by groups of grackles. However, these are not names for a collective group of the species. For grackles, there does not seem to be any accepted species-specific group name.

I'm removing the entire sentence about groupings of grackles, both the name of the group, and how/why they group. If someone has a reliable source on group grackle behavior, restoring information on this would be welcome.

--Agyle (talk) 16:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)Reply

The question of the name for a group of grackles, as a "plague," was previously researched on the terms of venery page. I found multiple references including: Murphy-Hiscock, A. (2012). Birds - A Spiritual Field Guide: Explore the Symbology and Significance of These Divine Winged Messengers. Adams Media. p. 86. ISBN 978-1-4405-2688-6.

When I get a chance, I shall probably restore the term to this article. Dstern1 (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

I always call them a "party", but that's not based on any reliable source. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:24, 29 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Many sources include the "plague of grackles" claim since it was popularized in this Wikipedia article, and Murphy-Hiscock's 2012 reference could simply be another circular reference to this Wikipedia article's claim. I think it's a mistake to accept sources of facts unverifiable prior to their inclusion in Wikipedia, as non-scholarly authors often rely on Wikipedia as factual. Murphy-Hiscock seems to have no expertise in etymology or ornithology, with their other literary works focusing on witchcraft, spells, and related supernatural practices. --Agyle (talk) 00:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

It's impossible with both google and Wikipedia to find the Great-tailed_grackle if one does not know that term...or even know there is an "uncommon grackle." (Thank you comment above!)

They have moved from Mexico to Fresno, center California and beyond, in great flocks. They are easily IDed by their loud jungle-ish call, —nothing else in California like it.

I think there should be a link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:7C70:9452:612D:5C99 (talk) 01:07, 18 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

There is a link to the great tailed grackle article from Wikipedia's Grackle page, which is a disambiguation page that currently lists articles on 11 different species that are considered grackles. This article is about just the common grackle, which is one of those 11 distinct species, so it seems reasonable that it doesn't mention the other species. --Agyle (talk) 01:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

The word "attunation" is not present in any major English dictionaries (Oxford English Dictionary, Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged, etc.). In Wikipedia, it is only found in this article. Xakepxakep (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

The source (13) cited for magnetoreception is a study that only included one quiscalus bird. Not one species, literally one bird. I haven’t yet found a study on quiscalus specifically, I’ll have some coffee and see if I can. I’m not a biologist though, can anyone help?

I’m referring to footnote 13– Schnell, Gary D.; Dubois, Robert L.; Hutchison, Victor H. (1992). "Natural and Induced Remanent Magnetism in Birds" (PDF). The Auk. 109 (1): 43–56. doi:10.2307/4088265. JSTOR 4088265 – via Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Oklahoma. Dianaemiko (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

This sentence implies the existence of more comprehensive studies that aren’t cited: “The common grackle (like most of its Quiscalus relatives) has been found to be attuned to a dynamic magnetic field to a scientifically significant degree.[13]” Dianaemiko (talk) 12:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

It must be a thing where people who use MS Paint to colour maps completely ignore the island of Newfoundland as it doesn't fill with the rest or something, but I can certify they are breeding in Newfoundland, I have seen dozens of such birds around Gander with my own eyes. The map needs to be updated. Rmm553 (talk) 00:08, 13 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

In this sentence:

Adults have a long, dark bill, pale yellowish eyes, and a long tail; their feathers appear black with purple, green, or blue iridescence on the head, and primarily bronze sheen in the body plumage. Adult females, beyond being smaller, are usually less iridescent; their tails in particular are shorter, and unlike the males, do not keel (display a longitudinal ridge) in flight and are brown with no purple or blue gloss.

shouldn't the first useage of "adults" be chaged to "adult males"? S Philbrick(Talk) 21:24, 23 June 2024 (UTC)Reply