Talk:Comb (anatomy)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Comb (anatomy) 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. Please do not substitute this template. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. |
|
WikiProject Birds To-do:
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | ||||||||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Agriculture, which collaborates on articles related to agriculture. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Guans
Guans have wattles and some have crests, but they don't seem to have combs. Can anyone confirm either way? --Macrakis 23:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 00:52, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
There are three main points against using Cockscomb as the name of this article. Obviously the plain Comb is out of the question, so it should be disambiguated. I just think this is the wrong way of disambiguating it, as using such an archane term confuses people and makes an inaccurate suggestion. I want to really work on improving this article and bringing it up GA class at least, but I am dissuaded by the improper name.
- A cock is a male Gallinaceous bird exclusively, but female birds of these species do have combs too, even if they are small or practically non-existent in some breeds. Thus, saying the proper term for the anatomical feature is "cockscomb" is misleading.
- Colloquially the simple "comb" is vastly more common than the archane "cockscomb".
- Modern reliable source material almost exclusively uses "comb". Just a few of the sources I have in front of me (mostly about chickens, which is primarily the bird people refer to anyway on this subject) can be found in my sandbox.
I would be comfortable with either Comb (anatomy) or Bird comb, but something needs to be done in my opinion. As a side point, bird comb gets 184k Google hits, with Cockscomb getting 159k, with all of the first ten other than this article being about the flower. VanTucky 00:33, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Comment - Biologically I agree to the move, but might a split be better, with this page either serving as a dab page or as an article for one other the other uses (like the helmet?)? Which term is most commonly used in cooking? Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think cockscomb is, but it's such a rare ingredient in food today that I consider the impact of cooking to be negligible. A comb is an anatomical feature first and food last. VanTucky 02:16, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I guess so. I guess I support. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
