Talk:Ruddy Shelduck

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

[edit] York mascot

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)

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)

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 ^{[citation needed]} 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)

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

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)

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