[njlarsen]

Discussion thread for Orange-backed Troupial. If you would like to add a comment, click the Post Reply button.

This species is part of the Troupial trio, Venezuelan Troupial, Campo Troupial, and Orange-backed Troupial. The trio has been split in three by Clements, in two (Venezuela T vs the rest) by Sibley and Monroe, and not split by H&M. Our consensus is therefore not completely clear about what to do in this case, but to flag the problem, I did add a "Merge" template (even if the result was not quite what I expected), with a note that this one should be merged with Campo Troupial. I propose holding off from doing the actual work of merging until we know if the next issue of H&M change their views, given that the page already exist in opus.

Niels

[jthoppes]

No idea what we should do with the taxonomy of this one, but the right merge result will look like this:

{{Merge|desired merge target}}

I've just fixed this one.

[njlarsen]

Originally Posted by jthoppes

No idea what we should do with the taxonomy of this one, but the right merge result will look like this:

{{Merge|desired merge target}}

I've just fixed this one.

Thanks JT!

Niels

[Rasmus Boegh]

Originally Posted by njlarsen

Discussion thread for Orange-backed Troupial. If you would like to add a comment, click the Post Reply button.

This species is part of the Troupial trio, Venezuelan Troupial, Campo Troupial, and Orange-backed Troupial. The trio has been split in three by Clements, in two (Venezuela T vs the rest) by Sibley and Monroe, and not split by H&M. Our consensus is therefore not completely clear about what to do in this case, but to flag the problem, I did add a "Merge" template (even if the result was not quite what I expected), with a note that this one should be merged with Campo Troupial. I propose holding off from doing the actual work of merging until we know if the next issue of H&M change their views, given that the page already exist in opus.

Niels

I'd strongly suggest splitting it into three (Venezuelan, Orange-backed & Campo). There is very strong evidence (morphology, vocal, behavior, and, most recently, sympatry [e.g. in Tocantins, Brazil, Orange-backed and Campo occur together w/o any evidence of interbreeding - same can be seen in Belém where both have been introduced]) that they should be split and this is a case where I'd be willing to guarantee that authorities that haven't split them yet will do so in their next update (at least if they keep even a bit update with the developements). I might suggest a small update to the OPUS rules; generally, follow the already established idea (follow the majority of the major check-lists), but not when we are aware of strong published evidence that clearly shows the minority is right. The troupials are one such case.

[njlarsen]

Originally Posted by Rasmus Boegh

snip
I might suggest a small update to the OPUS rules; generally, follow the already established idea (follow the majority of the major check-lists), but not when we are aware of strong published evidence that clearly shows the minority is right. The troupials are one such case.

The only problem with following that rule is that most of us do not have the educational background or knowledge of published/unpublished data to judge if the evidence is strong.

I realize you have that knowledge, and I am willing to delete the "merge" flag in this instance; but most of us do not have that background.

Cheers
Niels