This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Ruddy shelduck has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 25, 2015. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Ruddy shelduck appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 November 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that the ruddy shelduck (pictured) is a mainly nocturnal bird? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ruddy shelduck.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Africa: Western Sahara Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Western Sahara (assessed as Low-importance). Birds Low‑importance Ruddy shelduck 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Birds To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more) Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more) Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more) Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more) NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more) Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more) Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more) Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more) Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more) Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles. More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo. Southeast Asia: Laos Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects 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.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Laos (assessed as Low-importance). India Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Turkey Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics 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.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Nepal Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nepal, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nepal-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page and add your name to the member's list.NepalWikipedia:WikiProject NepalTemplate:WikiProject NepalNepal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mongols Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mongols, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mongol culture, history, language, and related articles 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.MongolsWikipedia:WikiProject MongolsTemplate:WikiProject MongolsMongols articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Switzerland Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland 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.SwitzerlandWikipedia:WikiProject SwitzerlandTemplate:WikiProject SwitzerlandSwitzerland articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is one of these ducks here in Woodstock Ontario Canada at Southside park I have a picture of one on my digital camera

I recently added some information about the mascot at the University of York, which was then deleted. I am aware that such information has been added previously and was also (obviously) deleted then. It is probably because there has been a surge in literature on the duck in recent weeks which has caused the edit on here. I can not understand why it is always removed as being "ridiculous". The mascot is well known throughout the university and the entire City of York. He is featured on pretty much all the literature for various York socities and is, as far as I know, the most famous Ruddy Shelduck there is. Surely famous examples of a subspecies should be included on the page. If there are other examples, they should be listed also. Child of Albion 15:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This trivia has been deleted by two registered users and an anon, and (re)created by one registered and an anon (both users of York University computers), so I accept there is an issue. I oppose the reinstatement on the following grounds.

1. The addition is unsourced - information, particularly if controversial, should be verifiable and sourced.
2. Notability has not been established, since the info provide makes assertions not back up by verifiable sources
3. Even if the notability were established, doubtful, since this bird appears to have at least three different names, this is not the appropriate page. The University of York would be more suitable
4. It is a bad precedent to have unofficial mascots added to serious articles.

hope this helps, jimfbleak 16:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. I fail how to see that this York information is "controversial" as not a singly person has claimed it not to be true. Generally the wikipedia policy is to leave information up with a ((Fact)) tag unless someone else actually claims it isn't true (rather than just doubting it) Besides, there isn't a single citation on this page. Should the other information be deleted also? I did provide a citation proving the existence of the lone Ruddy Shelduck, which is notable in itself in a place as far north as Yorkshire, England for an Asian bird.

2. Isn't this the same as 1?

3. I accept the issue that some have claimed another name, so I agree this information should be left out.

4. Who is to decide what is not serious and what is serious? Is there a wikipedia policy on this, or is it your viewpoint? There are plenty of "serious" articles with "non-serious" information on them.

Child of Albion 19:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not controversial because it's untrue, but because it's not notable enough for a global encyclopaedia. Your point wrt to citation is correct, I've added sources for all the non-Trevor info. there are wikipedia policies on notability, which I'll track down when I get time. jimfbleak 19:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Wikipedia:Notability[reply]

I noticed that I am one of the editors who removed this bit in the past. If this was a vagrant, I presume it has been noted in a local ornithological journal and think it could be noted with a citation along with the info that it became quite popular. The fact that it got named as a school mascot may be more suitable for the school article rather than the bird article. If it was instead of a vagrant, an escapee, it may again not be worth noting, since there are lots of exotic species escaping and becoming temporary objects of curiosity. Hope that perspective helps. Cheers. Shyamal 13:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most records in western Europe are vagrant/feral. jimfbleak 13:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article makes a curious (unsourced) claim: Although this bird is observed in the wild from time to time in eastern North America, no evidence of a genuine vagrant has been found. Huh? From the definition given in the vagrancy article, this makes no sense. If it's observed in North America, it's a vagrant. What other evidence do you need? —MiguelMunoz (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:A couple of Tadorna ferruginea.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 22, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-06-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:07, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day

A pair of ruddy shelducks (Tadorna ferruginea) in Springe, Hanover. This shelduck species lives in the open country and is usually found in pairs, though large groups may form moulting and wintering gatherings.Photo: Michael Gäbler

Archive – More featured pictures...

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ruddy shelduck/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 15:54, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First reading

• Is this written in British English? If so, place the template ((British English)) to the article's talk page

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the taxobox, instead of saying "Pair", say, "Pair of ruddy shelducks"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the lead, instead of saying "...member of the duck, goose and swan family, Anatidae", say, "member of the family Anatidae"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the lead, instead of saying "The call is a loud honking", say, "They have a loud honking call"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Taxonomy section, italicize "ferruginea" since it's talking about the species name

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Description section, instead of saying "The female is similar but has a rather paler, whitish head...", say, "...rather pale..."

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Distribution and habitat section, wikilink "shingle banks"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Distribution and habitat section, "Arrives in north India by October and departs by April" is a fragment, try adding "They" to the beginning of the fragment

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Behaviour section, you misspelled "omniivorous" (you used two i's) yet for some reason it still wikilinks to the article Omnivore. You might want to fix that.

Done (I had piped the link). Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Behaviour section, wikilink "Düden Gölü"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Behaviour section, remove the comma in "The female in particular, approaches..." or add a comma in front of "female"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Behaviour section, wikilink "fledge" or explain in the text (this is optional)

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• In the Status section, instead of wikilinking AEWA in the passage "...Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA)...", wikilink, "Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds"

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

• Garcia del Rey (currently ref no. 6) is a deadlink

Replaced. Thank you for taking on this review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Final comment

• In the See also section, why did you give a description of the article?

That statement was there before I started expanding the article and I have now removed it as irrelevant. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This was a short, yet thorough, article so, after this, it'll pass.

See Nat. Hist. of the Ducks &c. for more info on ruddy shelducks possibly being the ducks of Pontus in antiquity who were famous for having become poisonous through consumption of toxic plants and whose blood was used as an antidote serum. — LlywelynII 04:28, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]