• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

World Bird Names Updates (1 Viewer)

Sally Conyne

Active member
Hello Birdforum Friends,

Thanks to international contributions from many, we’ve updated and added to the World Bird Names Website.

The website for IOC guidelines and recommended English names of world birds (www.worldbirdnames.org) now includes:
• David Matson and Dave Sargeant’s Excel spreadsheet comparing the updated IOC list to the new Clements Sixth Edition (2007)
• Updates of species taxonomy and alignments to the lists of the AOU (NACC and SACC), with annotations and references
• Excel file with updated species file in computer format
• CSV version of species file for database projects
• XML version of species file for website projects
• OnLine copies of recent reviews (Cheke, Pearson)
• Updated corrigenda applied to the full list


I hope that you visit and find the site helpful,

Sally Conyne
 
Thanks Sally, so good to have an update on progress. After a slip-up by me on another thread its good to have such an excellent reference.

Thanks,
 
I find no logical reason to standardise the common names of birds around the world. We have binomial scientific names to serve as unique identifiers. What does it matter if we refer to lapwing or peewit, whaup or curlew? Such names add to the character of people and places. If I were a cynic I might think it was simply to sell more bird books. Our South African bird names have been particularly harshly treated, and many of us see no good reason for our names of long standing to be arbitrarily dumped for some name in usage elsewhere.
With best wishes,
Dave Kennedy
 
Warning! This thread is more than 17 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top