Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Gallinago stenura - Laem Pak Bia.jpg

Pin-tailed Snipe

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2013 at 01:49:29 (UTC)

Reason: Snipes are often quite shy, and this is a fairly nice photo of this species. No other (categorized at least) photos on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Pin-tailed Snipe
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator --JJ Harrison (talk) 01:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great work but I think this would benefit from some sharpening... --Fir0002 02:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Tend to agree, so gave it a little. JJ Harrison (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per above. --Fir0002 02:52, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support A great image, as yours almost always are. Pteronura brasiliensis 16:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well captured with its habitat. --ELEKHH^T 02:27, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question: How can you be sure this is not
Gallinago megala? --Donkey shot (talk) 11:38, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
- Beak is shorter, tail doesn't project much beyond wingtips when folded, less white on the tail, more slender head. Pin-tailed is also a much more common record where the photo was taken. JJ Harrison (talk) 11:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - That does unfortunately not completely resolve my doubts. I would be glad to have an doubtlessly identified photograph of one of the two species (here is another one). But Oriental Bird Club annotates: Positive field separation of this species compared with Swinhoe's Snipe Gallinago megala is currently regarded as impossible, unless the spread tail is seen well or photographed, due to considerable overlap of field characters. I have not yet read the cited paper (I’ll try to get it) but the ID features from older literatur (e.g. Hayman et al.) may be quite useless. For I am no expert I am also uncertain if the lateral rectrices, visible in the photograph are of any use for identification. --Donkey shot (talk) 18:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Perhaps I've been a little mislead by my books then. This reminds me of the
      Shy Albatross debate (there is even argument as to if they should be split). There, it is possible to tell if a bird is definitely Shy by yellow at the base of the culmen. But the converse is very difficult. Some suggest differences in the colour of a few of the primary flight feathers, but I don't think that is definitive. Morphometric measurements will give the right answer about 80% of the time. Anyway, Swinhoe is a rare record at the site where this photo was taken. Capture and release to band waders does occur there, so records don't just rely on field observation. So it is unlikely that I'm wrong. Fortunately, I think I have some mediocre quality flight shots. I can have a look at the tail when I get home from work to ease your concerns. JJ Harrison (talk) 02:02, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      - It would be great to get a 100% ID by additional photos. If not we should add a comment about how the bird was identified (+ the fact that megala is a rare visitor in this place, + a short note on the difficulties like OBC does) to the description of the image or/and copy parts of this disk on the discussion page there. I think that a proper documentation is important in this case so an author can decide himself about the use and caption in an article. I have already used the other photo in the article about Swinhoe’s in the German WP with an explanation of the id difficulties. By the way I do not question the quality of the image. It is great. --Donkey shot (talk) 09:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I've looked through the other shots. I have a flight shot, but there were a few snipes around and I'm not 100% it was the same bird (it did have an appropriate tail I think though). However, carefully looking through the photos of this bird I think I have one or two shots where a feather or two of the 'pin-tail' are visible. So I'm pretty satisfied. I did get your email but I haven't had the time to respond to it. JJ Harrison (talk) 04:05, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Stunning photograph, but I would like to make sure we're certain of the ID. J Milburn (talk) 22:43, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support : Beautiful click. Mydreamsparrow (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very nice shot, but I find that the background is a little messy.
(on the arctic ice) 10:30, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Support if field distinction of the two species is next to impossible then I think we can be forgiven if we include this in the wrong article. We can move it to the correct article if we change our minds about the identification. JJ's identification seems well within reason and I'm sure he knows his birds a lot better than I do. --Pine^✉ 20:07, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Gallinago stenura - Laem Pak Bia.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 01:50, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]