I have four that regularly visit my front yard, whenever our three goats are out to pasture far enough from the house. The impression that I get is that they will associate with any animal that disturbs or attracts the insects they feed on. Whenever a Water buffalo passes by (the neighbors have one), they ignore the goats. It seems given the choice, they prefer the bigger animal. Perhaps the Water buffalo somehow attract more insects compared to cattle because of their grazing habits? I'm not certain, and this certainly can't be considered encyclopedic content, but you asked for my view, so here it is. :-) Alternativity19:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
Northernmost vagrant?
Latest comment: 12 March 20086 comments4 people in discussion
A Cattle Egret was observed from October 9 to 18, 2006 (ratified by the Finnish Rarities Committee on December 9) in Pekkala, Rovaniemi, Finland (66°21′22″ N 26°49′41″ E) – or 22.6 km (14.0 mi) south of the Arctic Circle – and I was wondering has this species been observed this north ever before? This was only the second natural occurrence of the species in Finland (the previous was from May 15 to 17, 2002 in Storby, Eckerö; there's also one more record of a "coromandus" type bird from Märäjälahti, Lieksa and neaby area from July 31 to August 18, 1994, but this was an escape). I saw the bird myself on October 17, and only a minute or two later it started snowing – something this species is unlikely very familiar with. A Cattle Egret, believed to be the same individual, was previously (October 6 to 8) observed in Niemelänkylä, Ylivieska, meaning that it had traveled a distance of at least 274 km (170 mi) in one day. You can find photographs of all said individuals on this page. --Anshelm '7714:30, 26 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Cattle Egret (3 votes) is collab for March-April 2008
Cosmopolitan species with fascinating history (world wide traveller that it is) and easy to get info and images on - plus we have no big heron articles yet. Sabine's Sunbirdtalk00:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I have uploaded another 11 images from flickr to commons. A few may be better than some of the current images for the article - take your pick. Snowman (talk) 13:26, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Breeding needs much expansion. Nothing about sibilicide, fledging times, parental care, brooding, success etc, breeding season times outside Australia.
Spread in South America - need some info on this. More info on movements in Africa would be good too. Also possibly mention some of the other vagrancy.
I am trying to trace some "grey" literature (should hopefully qualify WP:RS as it is a local publication of an established natural-history organization) on their nocturnal migration in southern India. Can be readily observed against the moon along the eastern coast. I was a bit surprised to find that there is hardly anything scholarly on the topic. Can someone with access to Hancock-Kushlan check out if there is any information on nocturnal movements/migration of Cattle Egrets. Shyamal (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)Reply
I can create a map of the range, but need info on their range in Eurasia - so far have only found Americas and Australia. Anyone have a link to worldwide maps that I can reference to do this? 63.118.227.254Enviropearson (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Update
Latest comment: 9 April 20086 comments2 people in discussion
Slowly improving, but needs a serious copyedit, I did a quick read through and picked up about 15 errors and infelicities, but there are bound to be more
Intro needs a bit of work
Although everything is reffed now, refs are a mess, inconsistent with each other and sometimes incorrect (eg isbn). I might go through these when I'm feeling strong enough, if other can pick up the intro and ce.
I got to ref 17 before disrupted by edit conflicts. Please, please, please
either use cite templates, which format automatically, or make sure that manual refs are formatted correctly - look at the cite template ones if not sure
use ndash for page ranges, not hyphens
format page numbers consistently, I've defaulted to no symbol (eg not p, pp or P.p)
There is a website there, but the link leads to a page that says that the website has been reorganised. It is a login only site, and I did not log in. Snowman (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I've killed the courtesy link since it doesn't access the text and not needed. For books and journals I often don't even link to abstracts, just full text. Jimfbleak (talk) 15:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
comment
Latest comment: 3 July 20221 comment1 person in discussion
I don't know your protocol here for reporting. But I do know plagiarism. I don't know if this was plagiarized, or it is plagiarism. The very first spot I found it was is SANBI. I don't know which is primary or if the author did the citation. DrPMO17:43, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply
Read this
Latest comment: 10 April 20082 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 15 April 20087 comments2 people in discussion
Guys, do you want to run this one through GA? Looks near enough to that level to be a good staging point and a chance for a fresh pair of eyes on it. Cheers, Casliber (talk·contribs) 10:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
I'm still not convinced by the intro, and nothing yet about it acting as a carrier for disease vectors like Newcastle disease and Heartwater Jimfbleak (talk) 11:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 April 20084 comments2 people in discussion
Some of the captions of the images do not include the subspecies. Also, I wonder if it would be clearer and simpler to have separate subsections for each subspecies. Is an image of one of the subspecies missing? The lay out of the images do not make it easy to compare the subspecies. The diet in the introduction is not clear except it eats insects, and could be misleading if only the introduction is read. Snowman (talk) 09:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
If the Seychelles form is counted as a ssp, there is no usable image available (not a problem, no illustration at all required at GA). AFAIK non-breeding birds cannot be identified by sight to ssp, and although the location obviously is a strong pointer, I'm not sure it's necessary to add for white birds. Jimfbleak also tweaked intro (talk) 11:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 17 April 20083 comments3 people in discussion
A commons link is useful since there really are a large number of images out there. Unfortunately the commons template needs some space and it is best accomodated within an external links section with at least about 2 or 3 links. Shyamal (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Map border was unintentional and can be edited out. But looks like we have really little global information on the distribution of a common species. Shyamal (talk) 13:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Is it appropriate to put a striped zone for "Egrets are present here but the details of their spread are not well recorded"? Snowman (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Can't get the Google book link to work, try again later. Why is status a subheading of relationships with humans? Better as a heading, or, given its brevity, as a subheading of distribution and behaviour. Jimfbleak (talk) 06:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
It's fairly typical to have status as a subheading of relationship since it is usually humans that have the biggest effect on what the status is. It's usually our fault if something is doing badly, or, in this case, well. Sabine's Sunbirdtalk20:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 May 200817 comments4 people in discussion
Okay, so what else do we need to send this all the way? I'd suggest getting a new pair of eyes to pick over the prose, but it looks fairly good to me overall. Sabine's Sunbirdtalk04:14, 22 April 2008 (UTC)Reply
The male advertises in a tree in the colony As mentioned previously, this immediately leads a reviewer to ask "How?" I can't find an answer, so imho this should go if it can't be sourced. 06:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Distribution and habitat could explain the "Why" of its expansion earlier.
In every book I've read about the spread the spread was described first, then then explanation. That way it goes Natural range => new range=> why new range. Sabine's Sunbirdtalk01:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Feeding - does the term "conspecifics" need to be used? Could it at least be explained?
"Its Arabic name, abu qerdan, means “father of ticks", a name derived from the huge number of parasites found in its breeding colonies." - It eats ticks, right? So why would they be all over the nesting area?
Should this have further info? Why "stereotyped" are the behaviors the same as another species? - "The male advertises in a tree in the colony, using an range of stereotyped behaviours such as shaking a twig and sky pointing,[35] and the pair forms over three or four days. "
The defenition of a sterotyped behaviour is a relatively invariant mode of behaviour elicited or determined by a particular situation; may be verbal, postural, or expressive.. Often it is a mental deficiency or symptom of a problem (see Stereotypy) but in this context it just means that it is one of several repetative behaviours used as a display (see Albatross for their dances). Sabine's Sunbirdtalk01:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 May 20082 comments2 people in discussion
This species is or has been found in almost every country on Earth, and the swathe of country wikiprojects claiming it seemed slightly ridiculous. For that reason I removed the tags. I wonder how long before country wikiprojects claim things like air and roads just because they occur in their country too. Sabine's Sunbirdtalk00:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
From "The Herons" by Kushlan and Hancock, it listed Cattle Egret as Ardea Ibis as biochemical studies found that it is closer to Ardea. Should the Bubulcus replaced with Ardea based on the biochemical studies as written on the book?
Not sure about the type locality tag on this page, but if you see J L Peter's Checklist you will find that B. ibis is restricted to Egypt while B. ibis coromandus is given as Coromandel (probably Pondicherry). Shyamal (talk) 10:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)Reply
Just giving this a quick read through (late to the party, sorry). I'll list anything that needs fixing and for which there isn't an immediately obvious solution here:
the wikilink to "wading birds" in the lead takes you to the charadriiform waders, whereas I think that the North American heron/stork/ibis meaning of the term is what is really intended.
support this is a good idea. I think we can trim down a great deal of content that is being duplicated between this and the eastern/western entries. Shyamal (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply
Support, but not immediately. The two cattle egret species were recently split (IOC split them first, and other lists are now beginning to agree), and it will take some time to update the current FA-class article, which was written before the split. MeegsC (talk) 18:17, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Support. I don't think the cattle egret article needs much changing; we can just change the taxonomy and the common name used, and the remaining content can stay the same since the article refers to both (sub)species anyway. AryKun (talk) 16:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 November 20244 comments3 people in discussion
As this genus no longer is considered valid, perhaps we should merge various pieces into other articles, and then make this a disambiguation to the two species. Destinations for material are Ardea (the genus these two species are now in), and the two species western and eastern cattle egret. - UtherSRG(talk)14:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
The best thing is to move the information about cattle egrets to the main ardea page, and describe their differences form typical relatives in the genus (for example their affinity to dry land). This taxonomic revision is recent too The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 16:18, 26 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
I believe we should keep this page about the clade. I know it doesn't have a scientific name anymore, but there are quite a few other Ardea species too, so to have so much information about cattle egrets in the Ardea article wouldn't be right. This is still very much a valid concept, and I personally feel that Bubulcus should have been kept as a genus, with the 5 species listed before the cattle egrets on Ardea (bird) separated as Casmerodius, and only the 9 species listed after them remaining in Ardea. This is for the extant species, I don't know about the extinct ones. Who knows? Maybe that's exactly what they'll do in 2025.
Besides, we have articles for outdated, clearly non-monophyletic, taxa. Why shouldn't we keep this article for a monophyletic former genus and former species, that might be revived soon? Grey Clownfish (talk) 17:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
By the way, I don't know if it's sufficiently notable, but John H. Boyd III's taxonomy recognises Casmerodius, Bubulcus and Ardea as separate genera.