BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jos Stratford" data-source="post: 1230605" data-attributes="member: 12449">I agree, I hadn't intended to mean another subheading as such, perhaps the term subtitle would have been more accurate. I think the 'aka XXX species' is a suitable approach, my issue was/is Opus is (correct me if I am wrong) designed to appeal to a wide audience of 'general public' birders at all levels of experience and interest. As such, it seeks to educate and inform them - therefore, the very minimum that should be given are the names of the birds most commonly in use. Another example, should someone read all about 'Tundra Swan' on Opus (another page where the name most frequently used in the UK is not mentioned once on the entire page), then go to Slimbridge, they might easily not realise the bird in front of them is the one they had read about on Opus, none of the information boards at Slimbridge are ever going to mention 426 Tundra Swans on the scrape today. It is a failure of the Opus to not include usual names - that is basic information, far more useful to the average Joe Bloggs that detailed descriptions of the birds' breeding grounds, etc (not saying this latter information is not useful of course).</blockquote>