The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Brown Thrasher was originally nominated as the state bird of Georgia by schoolchildren in 1928, but wasn't officially adopted until 1970?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Brown thrasher is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Nice article, Stan. We are very thin on N. American species. I've changed the range, since I've seen these in southernmost Ontario, so the breeding range must extent up that far.
In Florida, I was shown a supposed Brown Thrasher by a guy supposedly writing a book on the birds of the Everglades. It looked like a Mockingbird to me, especially sat on a telephone post, so I shan't rush to buy his book! jimfbleak 16:36 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)
At my old home in South Florida we used to get them every year, at we believed they were Thrashers. Being that it was the closest thing we could figure from our 40 year old bird book. They used to nest in the cherry hedges and could be seen hopping through the yard through the day looking for food. Then they suddenly stopped coming.--Skeev 19:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove the code for this image from the article text (which can look messy), however a different bot may already have done so. You could also try to search for new images to replace the one deleted. If you think the deletion was in error please raise the issue at Commons.
I've been editing up the length of the page of this article over the past two days. It still needs work, I have to finish adding the citations where needed(among other issues), but I felt I could at least added what I had done so far. Far from great to me, but better that where it was prior to the day I added the Georgia WP on the talk page. Thanks for reading, and let me know if I did something wrong, this is the first article I've done extensive work on. LeftAire (talk) 05:05, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you follow what I've done here? You can easily format references like this, so going through to name and reduce replication will neaten up the reference section.
For some reason or another, I cannot reduce the replications properly without some citing errors appearing on the preview page. Reference 7? I'm not sure which one you mean now, but I'll keep looking. And I'll continue editing singular/plural as I ago along. Thanks for reviewing! LeftAire (talk) 21:40, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Link things like other species of bird mentioned, but only at the first time mentioned.
I removed the gallery as it only had images of adult birds, which added nothing new to the article. Look at the commons images to see what could be added. There are a couple of sound files. I added a nest and egg image and the audubon painting looks nice. The best thing is to sprinkle relevant images thru the text.
Also, have more of a look in Google Scholar for articles the Brown Thrasher - I can fetch some fulltexts if needed. I'll look a little later too, but need to sleep now.
I've added a few more links, and edited a few that weren't properly linked over the past few weeks. I'll try and find more peer reviews and Google Scholar links, but the majority that I could find useful are from JSTOR and out of my reach for money. I though I had something with the relation with to the closest Thrashers by adding onto it, but the BT was thrown out of the Study b/c it wasn't closely related to the Mimids of the Caribbean compared to the Northern Mockingbird & Grey Catbird. I'll try and find some more later this week, and sorry for the late response. LeftAire (talk) 17:42, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[[1]], [[2]], [[3]], [[4]], [[5]], [[6]], are the places from JSTOR that could be of potential benefit. [[7]] is the other source that I feel that can be significant asset, but not JSTOR-related. Thanks for the assisstance in advance! LeftAire (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, my free time has been patchy. In general, many articles from The Auk and The Condor are fully available in places online. I'll get to the rest of these soon. Casliber (talk·contribs) 21:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Agree the thesis looks interesting, but I can't see how to access it - it didn't come up via my uni logon. If you find anything else, gimme a yell, otherwise I'll take a look at the article once you've finished processing the studies. Casliber (talk·contribs) 04:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've obtained the articles. I'll attempt to have read them and make articles by the end of the week. If not, it definitely will be done within 7-8 days. LeftAire (talk) 16:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(1) Something's happened to refs 18 and 19 in formatting. (2) adding imperial units to some metric units lacking same (3) we'd normally add all the isbns to the books (found down the page on the "about this book" page of google books....sorry, I know it's a hassle.
The Animal Diversity website has good material on life expectancy and life span which should be in the article.
The isbn's won't be much as a hassle as that 18 citation. I cannot get that fixed for some odd reason (I've had it happen for a few of those PDF files, but never this much) and I'm taking a break from that and going to look up those ISBN's. Shouldn't be long. LeftAire (talk)`
Finally finished the editing that needed it. Everything should be up for a final review. Now I'm going to get some much needed sleep. LeftAire (talk) 08:17, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):
6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:
Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: One last query is where file:Brown-Thrasher-rangemap.gif actually came from - the user must have got it from somewhere which can be identified as the reference. this looks a bit different. You could ask the author or if you find one with the same boundaries then list that as a source of the information. Casliber (talk·contribs) 13:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: - looking all in order but one image query. If you have a reliable source map which matches then list it on the image description.Casliber (talk·contribs) 13:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The name "thrasher" is most obviously a variant of "thresher." The bird's foraging behavior, like all of the "thrashers," is to thresh -- to go through loose leaf and scrub and move its bill from side to side in order to disturb or uncover food. Therefore, the idea that the name might have come from aggressive behavior, intimated in the "Behavior" sub, is just plain weird. Even without "thrasher" being an Americanism or ornithological adaptation, the birds thrash the understorey. Hithladaeus (talk) 20:08, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence “It has also been noted for its flexibility in catching quick insects, as the amount of vertebrae in its neck exceeds giraffes and camels” is problematic; “the amount of vertebrae” is ambiguous and possibly misleading, especially when connected to giraffes and camels. All mammals have the same number of neck vertebrae (“amount” makes no sense), regardless of the length of the neck. Some really more familiar with the bird’s anatomy and sources should amend this to be more clear.
Kludgel (talk) 16:31, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]