Jump to content

Talk:Red-crowned crane

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Unverified and unsourced statements

[edit]

From User: Oda Mari Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Red-crowned Crane worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 18:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Why the Hell did you reverted it?!
You know this page contain unsourced facts and you know it.
THIS IS NOT AN EXPERIMENTATION!
I'm just doing my job.
You're just no different than a vandal.
What makes you think I've added "[citation needed]" are true or not?
88.105.125.238 (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THIS IS THE BOMB YEAH OK WHATS UP YEAH —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.64.200.127 (talk) 01:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second rarest?

[edit]

The article says the red-crowned crane is the second rarest crane in the world. What's the first? LordAmeth (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Crowned Crane which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was closed (and the pages moved) on 26 March 2014, see Talk:Crowned crane#Requested move for details.
Mama meta modal (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC).[reply]

problems with edits of 9 August 2021

[edit]

@Dodobird2004: In reference to a series of edits on 9 August 2021, existing claims seem to be partially merged, based on a source consisting of a Korean language YouTube video. Additionally, there are multiple issues with English mechanics, such that one cannot surmise the meaning.

These changes modified existing claims while retaining the existing sources, so it's not clear that the claims as originally stated were not supported. Specific issues which this sequence of edits raises:

  • Korean-lanugage (47 minute) video is a problematic source.
  • Editors who cannot understand Korean (and/or do not have the patience to listen to a 47-minute video) cannot verify the claims, nor can they fix the errors in mechanics.
  • Validation of changes to pre-existing claims is problematic.

Unless there is someone will volunteer to address these issues, I would suggest that the entire sequence of edits will need to be reverted. Fabrickator (talk) 21:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

[edit]

एनएन 43.241.126.232 (talk) 10:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]