Talk:White-chested white-eye

Birds High‑importance

White-chested white-eye 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

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

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.

Australia: Biota High‑importance

	Australia portal White-chested white-eye is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Extinction Mid‑importance

	This article is a part of WikiProject Extinction, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on extinction and extinct organisms. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.ExtinctionWikipedia:WikiProject ExtinctionTemplate:WikiProject ExtinctionExtinction articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Extinct[edit]

This bird cannot be extinct since 2000 when surveys in 2003 and 2005 had shown that this bird is still alive. So the classification as extinct is erroneous --Melly42 06:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the 2003 and 2005 surveys published, they are not mentioned in the 2006 birdlife international factsheet? --Peta 04:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--There is a press release from 2005 where they have written that this bird was spotted in 2003

see here. http://www.etravelblackboard.com/index.asp?id=41392&nav=21. The sighting in 2005 is based on an email which i have received by Mr. Stuart Butchart from Birdlife in the past year. I haven't found a publishing in the web yet, but i think they surely will publish the results of the 2005 survey in the next IUCN/Birdlife-Assessment (2007 or 2008). --Melly42 13:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You really shouldn't be putting original, unpublished information in wikipedia articles. --Peta 11:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EFBC-Material[edit]

From the EFBC-Website:

This database is not intended to be a complete source of information on the matters it deals with. Individuals and organisations should consider all the available information, including that available from other sources, in deciding whether there is a need to make a referral or apply for a permit or exemption under the EPBC Act.

Sorry, but i cannot use data from a website when they state that their material is incomplete and it even seems that this material is outdated in the case of the White-chested White-eye. So i think it would be the best to see this material as irrelevant, when you have other material which is in contrast to the EFBC-Material --Melly42

The species is listed as extinct under the Act. It is entirely relevant, and important, to mention that in the article, since Australia governs Norfolk Island. Much like the ivory-billed woodpecker; despite claimed recent sitings (although I can't find any reference online to sitings in 2005 as is claimed in our article) no one knows for sure; and no official surveys for over 20 years prior to the 2000 listing as extinct found any birds [1] thus the article should mention both the IUCN and Aus classification. --Peta 04:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also the EPBC is not some backyard operation, it is a Act of the federal government of Australia, and for a species to be listed at any level takes a good deal of research. --Peta 04:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]