Talk:Duck/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Edit request on 22 March 2012

In External Links, Wild Ducks Info – More info regarding the wild ducks. is misleading. Link takes you to http://www.duckhuntinginfo.com/ which is about duck hunting.

Nespola (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Y Done Thanks.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 18:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Quacks

In my experience, male ducks, Mallards anyway do quack and often. I hear them every day at the local lake. Onslow1 (talk) 04:21, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that's WP:OR, to change the article, we need a WP:RS Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:44, 20 May 2012

It's a matter of defining a "quack"; Mallard males make rather different sounds from females. —innotata 18:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Article links to facebook

Although the video link in this article purports to link to YouTube, it in fact links to Facebook, which of course requires a login. While I am not familiar with Wikipedia's policy on this subject, this seems to be intuitively improper. In any case, a link directly to the video would likely be superior in simplicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.228.228.28 (talk) 21:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Duck fighting

I read this article, and it does not include the sport of duck fighting. I need some more information on that [anonymous] 1:54 PM 16 August 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.238.183 (talk)

Can't find anything on "duck fighting" on Bing. —innotata 18:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

duck fighting was a sport when I visited China, maybe not a popular one.[anonymous] 3:51 PM 26 August 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.238.183 (talk) 19:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

adding to the etymology of the word

hello,

may i suggest to add the german word "tunken" (to dip) to the mentioned etymology.

not sure why this connection was not made but it should be evident when looking, for instance, at the online etymology dictionary, which states: ""to plunge into" (trans.), c.1300; to suddenly go under water (intrans.), mid-14c., from presumed O.E. *ducan "to duck," found only in derivative duce (n.) "duck" (but there are cognate words in other Germanic languages, cf. O.H.G. tuhhan "to dip," Ger. tauchen "to dive," O.Fris. duka, M.Du. duken "to dip, dive," Du. duiken), from P.Gmc. *dukjan."

"to dip" in german is "tunken" and phonetically very close to "ducan" - it is, in fact, closer than the suggested "tauchen".

greetings! (unsigned comment by User:Mittgenstein at 2012-10-04T16:05:31.)

It's not up to us to find new etymologies. You may or may not be correct, but you'll need a reliable source to support that. In any case, the modern German word is clearly not the etymon. PS Please sign your contributions with --~~~~. --Macrakis (talk) 22:12, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 27 December 2012

Please add after "Cultural References":
{

Duck Themed Things

Things themed after ducks include rubber ducks, costumes, and the world's largest rubber duck.
}
Thank you. Henrib736 (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Not done:. Your status allows you to to the edit and battle to keep it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Bear in mind that you should provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that your addition meets thenotability guidelines. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:23, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

I would like to apologize if my earlier comment seemed harsh. Protected articles are protected becuause of content battles (edit wars). It seems the simpler the article, the more the edit wars. If you look at similar articles like dog, cat, chicken, bear, etc. you may find some very cute edit wars.--Canoe1967 (talk) 07:39, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

JimfBleak, just out of curiosity, would this be added if I could provide independent verifiable sources proving that there are things themed after ducks such as rubber ducks, costumes, and the world's largest rubber duck? And Canoe1967, your earlier comment was not harsh. I think it was said correctly. Thank you. Henrib736 (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

@Henrib, thanks for message, I watch this page anyway. It's a certainty that without references such an addition would have no chance of survival. My feeling is that even with good references it would be considered too trivial to be notable in relation to the biological topic, or too peripheral. It would have more chance of survival as a stand-alone article, although I wouldn't hold my breath even then Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request on 21 April, 2013

Please either alter or elaborate on the origin of the phrase "sitting duck". Currently it is said that the reason for the saying is due to the ducks poor reaction time and mobility while on land. However, I have another source that says that the origin is because most ducks molt a large percentage of their flight feathers simultaneously, which leaves them with a very limited ability to fly. So hunters coined the term because of how easy the hunt was during this molting period.

Thank you. --Greatniss (talk) 12:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Etymology volunteer needed.

• The word 'drake' appeared once, casually, in the second paragraph of Morphology. I added: "A male duck is called a drake." at the end of Etymology, right after "duckling".

  It would be nice if someone would like to do a little etymologizing on it, considering the section title! Zipzip50 (talk) 05:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Done Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 July 2013

Under the Cultural references section, the Anaheim Ducks, University of Oregon sports teams and Long Island minor league baseball team are all mentioned with no mention of the Aflac Duck. The Aflac Duck has now starred in more than 55 commercials and is enshrined on Madison Avenue's Walk of Fame as one of America’s Favorite Advertising Icons. Further, many celebrities have starred in the Aflac ads with the duck, including Chevy Chase (2003); Yogi Berra; Yao Ming; Melania Trump; NASCAR Sprint Cup Series driver Carl Edwards (2008–); the United States Olympic synchronized swimming team (2004); and Wayne Newton playing at Stardust Hotel and Casino for the 2003 commercial. The Aflac Duck had a role in the Hollywood movie Lemony Snickets; a Series of Unfortunate Events, along with stars Jim Carrey and Meryl Streep. The duck has even appeared with Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Wile E. Coyote, and the Road Runner. With that stated I would contend that the Aflac Duck well deserves to be referenced under the Cultural References section. We ask that you please add the following to your page:

In 2000, Aflac Insurance Company, the number one provider of voluntary insurance in the U.S. and Japan, introduced the now famous Aflac Duck, a white Pekin Duck that remains the centerpiece of the company’s successful advertising campaign. In 2004, The Aflac Duck earned a space on Madison Avenue’s Advertising Walk of Fame.

JETT1955 (talk) 14:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done for now:. I think it might well be reasonable to briefly mention the Aflac duck in the article, but your proposed text seems too long and promotional in tone. Please consider a rewrite. It also would be helpful if you'd provide a reliable secondary source (e.g., an article in a major newspaper, periodical, or independent trade journal) attesting to the notability of said duck. Rivertorch (talk) 06:57, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

To quack or not to quack

Originally there was a paragraph: "Despite widespread misconceptions, most ducks other than female Mallards and domestic ducks do not "quack"; for example, the scaup makes a noise like "scaup..."

the sense of this was somewhat changed by an edit [1] in 2009 to (my emphasis):

"Despite widespread misconceptions, only the females of most dabbling ducks "quack". For example, the scaup – which are diving ducks – make a noise like "scaup" (hence their name), and even among the dabbling ducks, the males never quack."

The original statement was stating that most duck species don't quack but make other sounds, the modified version introduces a fallacy that "male ducks never quack". Which is patently false. And despite someone pointing this out [2], their objection was rejected in a reactionary way, demanding a reliable source when of course the original statement being protected had no such source. If anyone actually needs any evidence, of what is actually self evident to anyone who has observed Mallards, I have uploaded a video (with admittedly poor sound as there is a lot of background noise), of a male duck quacking. Yes it is quiet compared to the raucous noise that a female can make, but at about the same level as a female would use when communicating to ducklings in a non urgent situation. Suggestions that this is in someway not a "quack" are absurd.

I will now correct this. --Tony Wills (talk) 04:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of the prior discussion, neither version of the article seems to have citations to reliable sources. This needs to be fixed. Steven Walling • talk 04:38, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

I doubt that we need a citation to say that some ducks quack and some do not, some may want citations for the various noises that other duck species make if they think there is doubt. The aspect that I would expect needs some source is the assertion that most dabbling duck females quack, there may not be a single source for that, might have to go through each species to check - might be easier to just remove that particular assertion. --Tony Wills (talk) 06:40, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

It's not just the fact about which ducks quack. The text you wrote and which was previously there claim there are certain widespread perceptions among people. So it's not just the plain facts. You're also making claims about what most people think. I definitely think that needs a citation. Steven Walling • talk 07:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, "misconception" is not particularly good, I think they were just trying to express that because we have expressions like "quack like a duck" and in popular culture ducks always quack (citation needed ;-), that people might assume all ducks quack. But it is a bit of a straw-man argument, and not necessary for the article at all. I hadn't intended to do anything other than remove the erroneous statement about male ducks, but we could rework the paragraph some more. I'm not sure that the heading "communication" is particularly apt, as most of the section just talks about the noises ducks make and poo-poos the idea that some noises don't echo (can't imagine where that comes from). I would expect a section on communication to tell me something about how these vocalisations are used (eg gathering the ducklings together etc). Anyway for the paragraph we are discussing, how about:

Females of some dabbling ducks like the mallard make the classic "quack" sound, but most species of duck do not "quack". Ducks of the various species make a variety of calls, ranging from whistles, cooing, to yodels and grunts. For example, the scaup – which are diving ducks – make a noise like "scaup" (hence their name). Calls may be loud displaying calls or quieter contact calls." --Tony Wills (talk) 08:41, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

[Serious] 'Bird' to 'fish'

In order to exploit a loophole in my universities housing rules, I am requesting a temporary change to this article, in which every instance of the word "bird" shall be changed to "fish". My university allows fish as pets in the housing units, but does not allow any other type of animal. I want to be able to provide a home for an innocent duck. I want a pet duck. They are oppressing me. Help save a ducks life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SargeMacPhD (talk • contribs) 01:08, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

No. Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes 03:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

I have just updated this page with a photograph of ducks found in India. Now earlier in the day an individual undid my edit , actually he thought that the picture was of geese but that's not true. Take note of two important facts one is their beak also the ducks are standing near water and look carefully their bodies are heavier than an average geese. Indian duck look little different from the ducks in this Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakeshmallick27 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

The duck on the infobox picture...

... Is most certainly not a bufflehead. Just check the article for the bufflehead and compare. It looks like some kind of domestic duck to me. Could anyone who has access to editing the page (it's locked for me) correct the mistake?

87.52.45.224 (talk) 16:30, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2015

Please add information about the feeding of duck with bread. It should be discouraged because of the health of the ducks and the pollution of waterways. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doc zia (talk • contribs) 14:43, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 14:44, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Ducks relation to pollution

I would like to add content about ducks' relation to pollution in water, such as river. Ducks eat fish, and fish can pick up contamination, especially fat-soluble poisons like PCBs, and the pollution gets bio-magnified up the food chain. In rivers like the Housatonic River that have been polluted by PCBs, it can be dangerous for humans to eat ducks because they can be very high in the poison. It can be harmful and cause sickness or death. Some hunters know about this, but many do not. I think it would be useful as (1) good content and also (2) important knowledge for public safety. It could even result in saving lives. This could fit under "Relationship with humans". Thoughts? SageRad (talk) 00:37, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

United Poultry Concerns

Anyone else think the link at the bottom to this article is spam from animal rights activists? It doesn't seem like it rises to the level of being relevant to me--41.45.136.36 (talk) 03:32, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

How do ducks breed

The article doesn't how how ducks breed - is this a lack of knowledge or an excess of sexual modesty? ~cobalt69Cobalt69 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 March 2020

i would like to edit it because it needs a few more things :) Poopoonugget (talk) 13:15, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. CptViraj (📧) 13:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

A duck can be smart. Ducks are pretty animals. By the way, this is not a real fact. It MAY be, but it is being edited on the page by a kid. 😁 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:141E:5216:385D:DE19:A986:CDFF (talk) 04:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2020

Most popular species of ducks

The most popular species of ducks around the world are the followig:

• Mallard
• Northern pintail
• Canvasback
• Black Duck
• Blue-winged teal
• Bluebill
• Wood Duck
• Gadwall
• Common eider
• Northern shoveler

Raul Palomo (talk) 10:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

References

These aren't the most popular ducks, this is just the author's personal favorites, which isn't encyclopedic enough to include. – Thjarkur (talk) 11:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

Under the heading 'Domestication', the first image is of a group of white ducks labeled 'American Pekin ducks, a common breed of domestic ducks' The slender, upright body form of these ducks clearly identifies them as white Indian Runner ducks, not Pekins. It's obviously a bit difficult to 'cite' this, but the below reference is a breeder clearly selling the same ducks as White Indian Runners. Pekins, by constrast, are large, heavyset birds with the horizontal posture typical of most domestic ducks except Runners.

Shtinkypuppie (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Seconding the Pekin complaint

They are clearly Indian Runner ducks and not Pekin. The image has the Categories:

   White domesticated ducks   Indian Runner Ducks

Over at http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Domestic_duck they are described correctly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2406:3400:211:5F10:6431:BC68:A937:1888 (talk) 09:34, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

What is the basis for “quackery”

How is it that a supposed collective noun is unknown to the Internet in the year 2021? We have to take someone’s word for it that it’s in one book, which can’t be confirmed? I am not steeped in Wikipedia minutiae, I am only a person with a modicum of sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Extempore (talk • contribs) 21:34, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Searching inside of the source provided by Neil Schoolman (talk · contribs) reveals no mention of the word "quackery," let alone support his false claim that it is a collective noun for ducks. His edit history suggests he has tried to perpetrate similar hoaxes in other pages before.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Tunnel of Ducks

Hello, I wanted to point out that the image linked here, titled Tunnel of Ducks

http://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Tunnel_of_ducks.jpg/330px-Tunnel_of_ducks.jpg

is incorrectly referencing the ducks as Pekins. Their appearance is more consistent with the Indian Runner Duck, a breed notable for their upright stance and running rather than waddling gait.

Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anks106 (talk • contribs) 01:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 May 2021

add to breeding/behavior if not already there in articles labeled duck "A high amount of mail ducks will try to force themselves on female ducks for breeding purposes" Duck of America (talk) 18:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2021

b Peanutbutterparrot (talk) 06:16, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 06:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Error in an image caption for Pekin ducks

Please change the image caption of the "American Pekin ducks, a common breed of domestic ducks" to "Indian Runner, a common breed of domestic ducks"

Alternatively, choose an image of a Pekin to use with that caption. The image is not of a Pekin, but of a white Runner duck. The white runners have the same coloring (white body, orange bill and feet) as a Pekin, but a different body shape. Runners stand upright and are often used in herding, which the original description of the image mentions. Pekins are larger and heavier, having originally been bred for meat production. , ,

--Dooryardducks (talk) 14:03, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done casualdejekyll 15:39, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2023

1. Under "Relationship with Humans", under the subject hunting, please remove the sentence:

These ducks may be contaminated by pollutants such as PCBs.[44]

This study is outdated. Also it is kind of weird and doesn't fit with the paragraph topic.

2. Under "Distribution and Habitat", under the subject predators, raccoons and skunks have displaced foxes as the wild duck's top predator in North America.

Source:

Thank you The bad backpacker (talk) 02:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Deltawaterfowl is not a reliable source. UtherSRG (talk) 11:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2023

citation for National Hockey League team, Mighty Ducks of Anaheim. https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Mighty_Ducks_of_Anaheim https://thehockeywriters.com/anaheim-ducks-success-story/ Jimacebedo (talk) 00:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm (talk) 08:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 April 2023

there needs to be an addition to the communications section of the article Theduckguy (talk) 18:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2023

Under “relationships with humans: domestication,” it states “Approximately 3 billion ducks are slaughtered each year for meat worldwide.[45]” I believe that figure is inaccurate. Most sources I found suggest that there aren’t even that many ducks (of all varieties) in the world. Period. I believe this sentence should be removed from the page entirely because there is seemingly no reliable source of to support this claim. 72.80.143.51 (talk) 03:03, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Did you read the source [3]?--Mr Fink (talk) 04:11, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

 Note: While I couldn't verify the cited source, this one states that "the 1.15 billion ducks kept in 2020 worldwide, 1.0 (89 percent) were in Asia". M.Bitton (talk) 11:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Citation is accurate. See also:

Duck production: an overview

A Jalaludeen, RR Churchil - Duck production and management strategies, 2022 - Springer

… Around 2.2 billion ducks were slaughtered in China in 2018, which was 74.6% of total ducks slaughtered in the world during the same year.

Consider also that the average meat duck is slaughtered anywhere from 8 to 16 weeks of age, so the living population at any given time is 460-900 thousand. Xan747 (talk) 13:53, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Conclusion

Picking up a duck may require patience and a gentle approach, but with the right technique, anyone can do it. Remember to always prioritize the duck's safety and well-being when attempting to handle it. By following the step-by-step process outlined in this article, you will be well on your way to becoming proficient in picking up ducks. So, go ahead and put your newfound knowledge into practice, and enjoy the experience of interacting with these charming creatures! 2A02:C7C:DB71:7900:2CA8:5650:619:8571 (talk) 18:07, 2 October 2023 (UTC)