Talk:Psittacus

Older comments

I notice that all of the external links have been removed from this article. Is the aim of wikipedia not to create useful content for its visitors any more? Are the reasons behind the removal of these links of a political nature or a genuine attempt to improve wikipedia. I am not so sure. (Notting)

On what basis that the link to Tinkerbell webpage got removed? By calling that as spam? Can I judge who you are? Tinkerbell link was the first external link placed into this page a few years ago.

What is the authority of that person and how much is his knowledge of keeping flighted parrot at home? That he want all others to partake of his own ignorance? They burn books in the past. So in modern times of Internet, bookburners turn to labelling stuff they dislike as 'spam' and deleting offending links?

Is it because the way to keep a grey parrot (or any parrots) is to cut the wings and take away flight from them and Tinkerbell webpage is heretical against that mindset?

That same mindset that also hold on to that long discarded set of misbelief that height placement of cage affect relationship of parrot?

121.210.208.39 00:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC) shanlung This page used to have lots of useful links to other wiki pages. Where have they gone, they were helpful!

Can anyone provide an authority for the claim that these parrots can imitate up to 5000 words? seglea 22:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)i can mine sang eminem moking bird

It's vague. See Irene Pepperberg's reasearch on Alex for more info. But they're certainly very inteligent and they can asociate words to objects (I think that's more important than a big number of words)

I cannot understand why Mikkalai removed my edit: "Greys captured in the wild need time and effort to adapt to human presence, and have a tendency to growl. Hand-fed Greys generally make wonderful and very affectionate companions. Rastapopoulos 07:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry. Restored. I cannot understand this myself. I looked into the history of my edits at this time period. I was tracking anon vandals from my watch list. Since wikipedia is a bit slowish, I usually open several windows for version comparisons. When this article was checked for suspect's contribs I most probably accidentally hit the "revert" button. I have absolutely no opinion about parrots and never edited pages about them. Sorry again. I will try harder to be more careful. mikka (t) 07:19, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Africal parrots need a special diet and need calcium suplements.

External links

It is unbelieveable that www.theafricangreyparrot.com has been removed as an external link and yet http://www.geocities.com/shanlung9/ remains.

One is a well built authorative site showing 2nd in google for the term "african grey parrot" with lots of informative articles and other resources. The other has some information and nice pictures.

www.theafricangreyparrot.com has been readded. I'll leave it to other members to decide whether the other site should stay. --Notting

02/03/07 any reason as to why it has been removed - ive checked the guidelines and the site falls within them _ Notting

With due respect, http://www.geocities.com/shanlung9/ is the only site that gave all the details on how to have and live with a flighted parrot. The training that is required, the environment that you need. That will enable people to stop cutting the wings and return the gift of flight back to the parrot. And enable them to take even more spectacular pictures of them and their greys. I do not pay money to Google and Tinkerbell webpage appear in the first page of Google search. There is nothing commercial in Tinkerbell site and I do not promote books that seem primarily to advocate that wings are to be cut or to advocate commercially prepared food. Do read more and you will find it contains a lot more than just 'some information and nice pictures'. Shanlung 02:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Having had another good look at the site http://www.geocities.com/shanlung9/ it does contain a lot of good unique information and I believe that it should appear in the external link section of this article - Notting

External links

I have removed two links (Information about Timneh African Greys and Information about Congo African Greys) which are local sales page with some additional information. The info is limited, and the main thing is to contact people for buying or selling birds. I think they are unappropriate as links for an encyclopedia article, see WP:EL. KimvdLinde 20:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

CHECK OUT THE "AFRICAN GREYS AS PETS" SECTION

Hey I recently restored the "African Grey Parrots as Pets" section of this article. Can anyone skilled in grammar and vocabulary check if the section's content contains any mistakes and enhance the section. By the way PLZ DON'T REMOVE THE INFORMATION ALREADY THERE. IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO GET THOSE AND THEY ARE FROM VERIFIABLE SOURCES. Birdeditor 21:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm unable to check your references for that section. Could you provide references from reputable online sources. Oh and PLEASE DON'T SHOUT, it's rude. --Dv82matt 00:38, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Take it easy birdeditor. If they are reliable and verifiable sources, it is not likely that they will be removed, unless it reads like a howto guide to Greys, in that case, it is unencyclopedic. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 00:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I have trouble with this sentence: "While captive-bred birds usually assimilate into their new households with relative ease, wild-caught African Grey parrots require (which are no longer legally available in the US or EU) can be difficult or impossible to take to life in a cage as a 'pet' bird." The part after the comma does not make much sense and I am not sure what is meant, so cannot correct it. 198.96.180.245 (talk) 15:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, the sentence now reads "While captive-bred birds usually assimilate into their new households with relative ease, wild-caught African Grey parrots (which are no longer legally available in the US or EU) can find it difficult or impossible to adapt to life in a cage as a pet". That reads much better to me. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Note re. 'wild-caught' African greys. Although these birds cannot now be imported legally as 'pets'into the UK (EU) or USA, they will remain 'available' for many decades. This is because grey parrots are long-lived birds and will be re-sold for many years. So, it would still be useful to state that greys known to be of wild caught origin can be difficult to keep as 'pet' birds since they would find such conditions too stressful. Wild-caught greys are best housed in a colony non-breeding aviary for the rest of their lives.

Greg Glendell 81.156.251.200 (talk) 18:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

"African Grey Parrots as Pets" - "verifiable" sources

Most of the information available in that section is taken from www.itsagreysworld.com, that site itself is owned by an experienced owner of multiple African Greys all of whom receive great individual attention according to the site. The site is contains some useful and genuine information and is very informative. The few remaining other sources are miscellaneous, and the information left by the contributor before me is not deleted. Birdeditor 21:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Surely this website should be referenced or put in the external links if the information came from www.itsagreysworld.com - Jamie Turner

The information is strangely identical to www.africancongogrey.com. So did itsagreyworld copied from africancongogrey or the other way? It doesnt matter at all to me since both believed that as long as wings do not touch side of cage and head tail do not touch top and bottom that it is ok. I am happy to remain an amateur if being an 'expert' meant advocating stuff like that.

Shanlung 12:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, I did a Yahoo search with portion of that article http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geu7.QyuZFj84A0ixXNyoA?p=%22become+territorial.+An+African+Grey+who+spends+most+of%22&ei=UTF-8&fr=ush-groups&x=wrt

And a whole slew of sites spewed out with that same stuff. Who copied who? Same kind of 'quality information'? Will even become self fulfilling prophecies. Was that link to Tinkerbell cut to allow those kind of stuff to go round and round new owners to be self-enshrining in stone?

Shanlung 12:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I work as a companion parrot behaviourist in the UK. I have bred grey parrots at one time, but no longer do so. Much of the information given on how to care for this species is not of sufficient quality to avoid considerable suffering in greys, were they to be kept in a cage of merely 36 inches wide and deep, and had their wings clipped and were hand reared (forcibly deprived of normal parental interactions prior to fledging). Birds raised and kept by these means are very vulnerable to severe behavioural problems once they mature at 2 to 4 years of age. Common behavioural problems in greys include stereotypies, self-plucking and self-mutilation. I can cite scientific sources as well as anecdotal sources for the problems being more likely in 'hand-reared' (parentally deprived)greys. Much information on care of captive birds is written by those who seem to lack a scientific understanding of animal behaviour. A better contribution would result from writers with some knowledge of applied behaviour analysis and/or ethology. I guess I should edit the article, but I feel like I'd have to re-do about 70% of it. Alfie1960 (talk) 10:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess that it would be great if you would provide some referenced scientific material. Why not make a start? Snowman (talk) 10:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Snowman, I have made some changes to African greys pages and added the references. Alfie1960 (talk) 16:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

External links

I am again removing an external link that has ads, which makes it commercial. Forums, blogs, and bulletin boards are not good Wikipedia links either. Any domain that is added to multiple pages is spam. And the animal telepathy site is not encyclopedic.

Wikipedia is not a link farm. DO NOT RE-ADD YOUR SITE. If your page is so noteworthy that it should be an exception to the spam and linkfarm policies, find a couple admins to review your site. Then one of them can add it back with an invisible note that it was added after review by an administrator. If I see that, I will leave it, although I can't speak for all the Wikipedia Project Spam editors (WP:WPSPAM). But it would probably be better to add content to the page rather than links. Pollinator 16:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I reviewed all of the external links as of today, and they all seem fine to me. So, I'm removing the spam tag. Cmichael 03:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Aging

I'd like to see a couple references to again, but I don't feel I have enough experience to do a major edit to an article such as this. Namely, I'm referring to the differences in appearance as CAG and TAG parrots age. After the first molt (around 12 months), tailfeathers grow back without black tips, but rather fully red. The iris slowly lightens from pure-black at hatch to bight yellow around 18 months. Also, vocalization in the form of human speech minicry typically develops around 12-18 months of age. Anybody feel up to it? Thadius856 18:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I think life expectancy should appear somewhere too. It's a more significant factor than some of the other information in the 'as a pet' section. 81.157.122.109 00:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Its in there. --LiamE 03:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to know...

Would it be acceptable to play around with the idea of splitting this article up into more topics?

It seems "African Greys as Pets" is kind of a vague spectrum. In this portion of the article it covers history to care. I don't find it very organized at all.

I think perhaps it would be more appropriate if we seperated the article into a few different topics such as "Care and Grooming" (Or something like that) "Habits and Lifestyle" (You see what I'm getting at?)

I'm not saying any of the information should be dumped, but just seperated in a more organized way.

Anyone with me on this?

-Also, I may have pictures of baby CAGs if you think there is a place for them.

Best Regards Le Peregrine 21:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I think we should keep the article in one piece, like I noted on your talk page, but the "African Greys as Pets" section should be seperated into subsections. I have tons of pictures as well, but lets worry about that for when we have a long enough article to fit a couple more pictures. thadius856_talk 22:49, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

I would like to see more pictures. Do you have a photograph of the eggs. Snowman 16:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Notice of import

A copy of this article was moved to wikibooks using the Import tool (with all revisions). If this article was marked for copy to wikibooks or as containing how-to sections, it can now be safely rewritten.

If contributors are interested in expanding on the practical information that was in this article, please do so on the wikibooks side. For pointers on writing wikibooks, see Wikibooks:Wikibooks for Wikipedians. --SB_Johnny | ^talk | _books 13:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

They eat

they eat artichokes, rice, chesnut, but many people say that hazelnut is poisonus for they . Are there references? 212.97.182.180 13:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I would question the claim that African Greys should not eat dairy products. Textbooks say they should have cheese for calcium. Anyone taking the advice of this author risks their African Grey having weakened bones. African Greys are NOT like other parrots. For example, they can eat boiled chicken.213.208.114.13 (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Aviculture WikiProject proposal

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Aviculture. The purpose of this project is to help increase the amount and quality of content related to aviculture on wikipedia, and to maintain and organise articles relating to the subject, eventually bringing as many as possible up to good- or featured-article status. Snowmanradio (talk • contribs) 16:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

Logic

"While comparative judgements of animal intelligence are always very difficult to make objectively..."

Wouldn't all comparative judgements be difficult to make objectively, by virtue of them being comparative and not objective? Or am I totally off-piste here? 81.157.122.109 00:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yup you are are a bit off on that. Whether or not a comparative judgement is objective or not depends simply on whether or not the subject being measured is being measured in objective terms. Lets say for instance we looked at a comparative temperatures for London and Moscow over a year the results would be objective as there is no confusion on how to measure temperature. On the other hand inteligence is far harder if not impossible to pin down. How do you compare Einstein to Da Vinci to Mozart? All geniuses in their fields to be sure but how would you objectively test that? Then try developing a test that thart a parrot can (or will) complete... Not easily done. --LiamE 03:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

book burner

"Wikipedia spam also consists of external links to websites which primarily exist to sell goods or services, use objectionable amounts of advertising, or require payment to view the relevant content. "

I do not see Tinkerbell webpage exist to sell goods or services and with no advertising and no payment required. By Wikipedia defination of spam, Tinkerbell webpage is not spam.

WHO ARE YOU TO TAKE ON YOURSELF TO REMOVE TINKERBELL LINK? IS IT BECAUSE YOU DESIRE ALL PARROTS TO BE KEPT CRIPPLED WITH WINGS CUT? THAT SHOWING PEOPLE A FLIGHTED PARROT CAN BE KEPT IS ABHORENT TO YOU AND MUST NEVER BE SHOWN AS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY?

Shanlung

Deli nk, that self appointed censor who insist on removing Tinkerbell link knew nothing on parrots and yet see fit to burn books that she knew nothing about. After throwing out that link saying that was spam, she tried to throw that out saying thats 'inappropriate'. I cannot see how someone who knew nothing on Congo African Grey Parrots will ever know what is appropriate.

Shanlung 23:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop shouting. Stop calling me names. I have never referred to it as spam. If you'll calm down, we can talk about it like adults. Deli nk 13:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is to be a collaborative effort that bring together information on a subject. For that to be meaningful, people involved must know not just at a deep level the subject matter, they must be involved directly in the subject itself. I shared years of my life with a Congo African Grey. I am also into many major parrot forums and well known as Shanlung for years. I have yet to come across Deli nk or Pcock in those parrot forums. It is a very valid question that I ask if you have kept African Grey or even other types of parrot. If you have not, how are you going to understand what is to go into that subject.

It is almost like reading all books on how to swim and decide you know all about swimming without even getting into the water. Then on that basis, you will decide the appropriate reading material for swimmers and people who want to know about swimming.

Telling me " link is inappropriate per WP:EL and WP:RS" is not reason enough. I read through WP:EL and WP:RS long ago. How much do you know of keeping a Grey that you can interprete WP:EL and WP:RS to be the judge, jury and executioner? Can I knowing only a little on flower and gardening decide to go into flower and gardening section and decide on what people are to read?

For such an intelligent creature as a Grey, why do you accept what is written that they can be kept in a cage as long as their wings do not touch the side and the head and tail do not touch the top and bottom of cage. Because thats written correctly grammer wise?

And pick on my link that offers respect and entirely different way of treating them?

There is no intellectualising about keeping African Grey. You must keep a Grey before you can talk about keeping Grey. All that I have done are easily verifiable from the hundreds of photos and videos that documented them. The material I offered is to allow other Grey keepers to glimpse into a world where the Grey is allowed full flight at home for them to decide if that way is better than keeping their grey in a tiny cage where the wings do not touch the walls and head and tail do not touch the top and bottom of cage. They also have complete and free guidance in the material to do what I have done or even better. I only want for those Grey keepers their choice to chose.

Shanlung 11:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Just my penny-worth. I found the Tinkerbell / free flighted Grey keeping very interesting. However as a single experience it isnt that encyclopedic. I'd rather see a link to a more generalised site on flighted grey keeping (if there is such a site) either before it or instead of it if the site itself includes the info from the Tinkerbell source among others. There are upsides to flighted birds that go hand in hand with risks that need to be managed - its not for everyone but it is interesting and adds another aspect to the article which can't be a bad thing. Although the Tinkerbell site is specific to Greys the keeping of flighted parrots is quite generalised and perhaps deserves an article of its own. --LiamE 04:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi LiamE, I want to thank TexasAndroid first as he rescued this entire section from being burned. I also restored that very important and balanced article on wings clipping. That was written by Pamela Clark, one of the foremost parrot behaviour consultant. That article was based largely on her experience as a breeder of African Greys and with insights into the mentality of Greys. That she went on to cover all other parrots as well should not meant that therefore, that article is no longer on Greys.

As for what is encyclopedic, that word meant 'covering or including a broad range of detailed knowledge'. As far as I know, there are no generalised site on flighted grey keeping. The only comprehensive site on flighted grey (or any parrot for that matter) is Tinkerbell site. I am not even certain if greys can or should be kept as 'pets'. They are viewed by me and all other grey keepers that I respect as family members and companions. Should I be asked to write on keeping them as pets, I decline. Talking about the physical aspects of their care will be very easy.

But thats such a tiny facet.

Of even greater importance will be the mental aspects and the relationships being developed with your grey (or other parrots). People are all different, and as greys are so intelligent, each grey will also be different from each other. The relationship established will be unique and different from one another. The only way to know of greys and other parrots will be to participate in online forums with others who are keeping greys. Should we try for an 'average' , it is like averaging or combining colors of rainbow to getting a meaningless 'white'. I decided I will tell the many grey keepers that I know of this site here. That if their participating here is vital too.. Hopefully, they will come and try to take part in the expansion of this article and make it better. Read that here http://shanlung.livejournal.com/65819.html

Shanlung 12:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I "rescued" the section because it was deleted by an anon, with no edit description whatsoever. Stuff on talk pages is only deleted for very limited reasons. And in this one, no reasons were given, so it appeared a very vandalistic action for the section to be deleted. I can guess at why it was deleted, someone disagreeing with your agressive way of handling things, for instance, but that would be only guesswork and speculation. As long as you do not violate the rules of the project, you have as much right as anyone else to be on the talk page. And an anonymous, reason-less, deletion of your message gives no justification for the deletion.

So, really, do not consider me to be on your side on this just because I reverted an apparently improper deletion of your words. The revert was an endorsement only of your right to speak here, not an endoresment of anything you have to say. (And, in the end, I'm not opposing you either. I honestly don't really care much about the subject one way or the other. I have the page bookmarked because it's a spam/vandalism target, and am keeping an eye out for such to revert.) - TexasAndroid 13:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

TexasAndroid,

I checked your page and your records after that rescue and could see your other works as an admin. Within the context of Internet, my arguements are mild but you are entitled to think otherwise. I rather you remain as a neutral Admin. You cannot take one side or the other especially your background indicated you are not into parrots, birds and greys in particular and cannot be expected to have the passion of one deeply involved. Thank you again

Shanlung 11:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi LiamE or any Admin here

Any thoughts on what I written in ""African Grey Parrots as Pets" - "verifiable" sources" ???

Shanlung 12:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

To Admins

Tinkerbell site has again been removed by anonymous on claims that 'adverts' are inside when in fact, no adverts are in there at all. I do have other more enjoyable pursuits in life than to do shadow boxing with nameless entites. If vandals knowing nothing but their focused prejudices are to be sole control of entries than little more will be said by me. I rather go smell roses than to indulge with them by replacing that link to be torn down by vandals yet again

Shanlung 02:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

.....................A potential FA canditate?

This page is on the way...added a description bit but I have run out of time for the mo'.

AFAICT - Needs a distribution section and surely there must be some meaty dna taxonomy info out there...and a bit of a tidy up of course. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 19:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It has far too much of a how to feel to the pet section to be a FA ATM. Titanium Dragon 04:34, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Too much of a how to feel

The section on Grey Parrots as pets has way too much of a how to feel. It needs to be wikified or removed. Titanium Dragon 04:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of external links on 08/15/07

I removed the following external links:

• African Grey Parrot resources
• African Congo Grey Resources
• African Parrot Resource

The first points to a (currently) suspended web site, the second appears to be a non-verbatim copy of the information in this article, and the third is an obvious "google ad" site. Unfortunately this leaves no external links - can anyone find any reliable and useful resources to link to? Ruyn 18:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It's no problem - many articles don't have any links. If one turns up sometime it can always be added later. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The first link is working again now. Re-adding Rich Farmbrough, 23:15 3 November 2007 (GMT).

Attack of the link Nazis

Who decided on the one page policy that nothing with an advert can be used? That is not wikipolicy. Granted if the site's sole aim is to sell you stuff it should be removed pronto but what is with informative sites that have a bit of advertising being removed? May I point out that many of the most informative sites on the net are commercial and contain advertising. Should we remove every link and reference to the Newscientist, for example, as it tries to flog you a subscription on every page? Surely the criteria must be the strength of the info the link contains not whether it contains advertising. --LiamE 09:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

i agree, this is typical wikipedian behavior here. chest pounding and quoting of "wikipedian policy". people use and abuse the "policy" to limit the site to what they wish it to be. if wikipedia were a commercial encyclopedia then maybe this would have some merit, but this is a communal project in which all points of view are to be shared, and providing legitimate external links pertaining to the subject is part of that process. i think the majority of people here are in consensus that it is a valid link and it is a small, but determined minority who keep removing the link. rather than asking why these anonymous editors keep deleting, lets just revert and replace. we already even have admin consensus that the links were ok.--71.205.253.125 (talk) 23:32, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Colour spelling

I'd like to discuss the spelling of the colour "gray" in the name "African Grey Parrot". I have never understood why gray is spelt "grey" in the name, since it is refering to the general colour of the bird. If anyone knows why this is so, can they please add information to the article? Thanks! --Adamd1008 (talk) 23:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It reflects the Commonwealth English spelling of the colour. For more info check out American and British English spelling differences. The article was clearly started by someone using the Commonwealth spelling, although a glance at the article shows that some other editor has used American spellings (color). For consistencies sake the article should be edited to reflect one spelling, in most instances the spelling of the original editor(s) is retained (in this case British). Sabine's Sunbird talk 23:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

It goes further than just Br Eng spelling in this case. Even in the USA the spelling "grey" is correct when referring to the parrot. Why I don't know, but it is. --LiamE (talk) 04:02, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Requesting Review of My Link

My brother and I have recently outdoor free flight trained our congo African Grey. We are a commercial site but these three pages do not suggest to purchase anything. Just great content. Please have a look and let me know. http://www.birdtricks.com/AfricanGreyParrots/congo-free-flight.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chet Womach (talk • contribs) 21:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Grey parrot makes international news!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080521/ap_on_fe_st/odd_japan_parrot_returns Bob the Wikipedian (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The intelligence of a 6-year-old?

Can the BBC be considered a reliable source on this? Can African Grays read and write? Can they write stories? Can they carry on conversations actually at the level of a 6-year-old? I mean, if they can learn to use language, then you could give one an IQ test. Would one really score like an average 6-year-old?

Can somebody find a more credible source, or an explanation of what the claim is supposed to mean? Mark Foskey (talk) 02:47, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Human children develop different abilities at different times. For example, children before the age of 4 don't appear to have a "theory of mind." A common version of the test involves having the child watch a video of two children. One child in the video hides a toy in place A and leaves the room. The second child moves the toy to place B. The child being studied is asked "Where will the first child look for the toy? Before age 4, the child will say B. Beginning at age 4, most children begin to understand the answer is A. These are the sorts of benchmarks that phrases "function at the level of a 4 year-old" refer to. Some birds have been shown to pass the "theory of mind" test. Parrots can engage in forms of logic, understanding of causality, and such that human children do not learn until 6-8 years old (going from memory there). Pepperberg's Alex transferring a zero-like concept from one usage to another would be an example. Greys can do some things that even the great apes cannot do. In a "Turing test" setting, though, no one would ever mistake an African grey parrot for a 6 year old human. I'd guess they function similar to a 1 to 2 year old at most, but my experience with human children is limited. Emotionally, most people seem to agree parrots behave like two-year olds on a bad day.

There are other questions: Alex was chosen at random--could he, by chance, have been exceptionally intelligent for a grey? How much of Alex's abilities were due to the environment he was raised in? Humans raised by animals have less intellectual capacity. Does being raised by humans give Alex and other pet birds abilities they would not have "normally"? What would happen to a human raised by super-intelligent aliens? UnSpace (talk) 16:58, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

It should be taken into consideration that it takes much training to get a parrot to get to this stage of intelligence. It could take years to get a parrot to talk at the level of a 2-4 year old child. It is has been said that when a child is learning in a room with adults that the child will say random words of names of things in the room to get the adults attention. The child is trying to join the conversation, a parrot on the other hand will repeat words that it has learned but will not have the capability of just knowing the name of an object unless it has been trained to learn the name of that object. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanchezst (talk • contribs) 02:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Red factor African Grey

Does anyone happen to have a GFDL/CC-licensed image of this colour mutation (or any of the other listed mutations for that matter)? I guess that if someone did, then it would probably be in the article already - but still, it would be a very interesting addition. Just a quick nudge. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 02:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

leg bands / rings

anyone know anything about what they mean
i have 2 african grey's and they'r bands have 4 letters and 5-7 numbers
and yeah those bands are put one by breeders
there are 2 types of rings / bands solid closed alminium and clammed rings (for putting on adaults)

Bands are not standardized. Breeders order bands with their codes. There used to be a web site listing breeders and codes, but last I checked it was defunct. Band information is often determined by the manufacturer. Often a breeder will use their initials or a few letters representing their aviary, a 2 digit year date and a chick sequence number--1, 2, 3, etc. Others simply have bands that run in sequence. Note that if there is a 2-digit year given, it may be inaccurate. If the breeder didn't order bands for 2009 yet and they need to band a chick, they may use last years--or one from 5 years ago! UnSpace (talk) 17:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

New articles for Congo African Grey parrot and Timneh African Grey Parrot

Should I make new articles for Congo African Grey parrot and Timneh African Grey Parrot? The High Fin Sperm Whale (talk) 01:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

i think there a symbol of birds that had sex with each other like two bands in the whole world that are the same had sex with each other

Noises

Under the subject Noises for this article, "R. Parnefjord, MD, Ph.D." has inserted original research written in the first person, both of which do not comply with style guidelines. I believe everything after "...and any other electronic sound that is often heard by the parrot." should be removed.

SyntheticProsthetic (talk) 05:20, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

my parrots say fuck me fuck me give me some sugar kissy kiss

What foods do congo african grey parrots prefer (in captivity)

Is it possible for anyone to give me some advise on the best foods to give my congo african grey parrot, she is 15years old and daily in a cage (because i work fulltime) I just want to give her the best affordable food. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.211.201 (talk) 08:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Try something like one third quality dry parrot feed, one thrid fruit - apples, bananas, grapes, whatever, and one third vegetables and greens - wahtever you have basically. Make sure you check up on what is poisonous - I cannot stress that highly enough. Also you need plenty of stuff for them to chew so it helps if you find a suitable tree you can get fresh chews from, again checking what is poisonous. Different birds like diffent things though and birds not used to a varied diet are often slow to adjust to it but it is worth persevering in the long run. --LiamE (talk) 22:51, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Original work?

This paragraph contains original work as source:

One exceptionally talented African Grey is N'kisi, who in 2004 already was said to have a vocabulary of over 900 words and was noted for creative use of language, as had been Alex. For example, when Jane Goodall visited N'kisi in his New York home, he greeted her with "Got a chimp?" as he'd seen pictures of her with chimpanzees in Africa. His voice sounds so near to a human's that a conversation between him and his owner seems to be a chat between two women.

You should also take a look at the website used as reference. The website claims an existing telepathic link between the parrot N'kisi and Aimee Morgana... Come on. Correjon (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Current scientific concensus : there is no credible scientific evidence for the existence of telepathy at all. Therefore the source is both original work and unreliable. Correjon (talk) 07:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

The website is run by a guy who in interested in the possibility of telepathy and so on and has details of a test conducted on the subject. The fact that he also links to critisms of the test suggests to me he is acting in a responsible manner, presenting both sides of an admittedly outlandish argument. While I am VERY sceptical of any results that point towards actual telepathy it is also wrong to dismiss out of hand well conducted tests with good methodology. Sure the result that pointed towards some sort of link is likely either abberant or wil be expalined at a later time by another mechanism or a flaw found in the methodology but that doesnt make the source unreliable for reporting on the test, its methodology, its results and critically the critisims of the test and result. Futhermore the paragraph quoted looks to be quite non controversial in any case. Science is not furthered by dismissing ANYTHING out of hand, only by conducting experiments to see what is demonstarably true so it simply is not correct to dismiss work on fields that fly in the face of scientific concensus. In fact many advances in science have come from people doing exactly that. --LiamE (talk) 12:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

african greys

hi just a quick question our african grey ruby has just laid an egg but her pooh a funny colour its brown was wondering if this was normal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.199.141 (talk) 14:40, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

citations needed

Citations of Pepperberg et al should link to www.alexfoundation.org. Pepperberg collaborated with various ornithologists (www.alexfoundation.org/papers/) Some researchers (e.g., Gagnon & Dor6,1992,1994; Pepperberg & Kozak, 1986; Triana & Pasnak, 1981; Wood et al., 1980).

IMPORTS: The USDA stopped importing African Greys in 1992 and has very limited records to identify birds. For example a split ring stainless band on one leg with the state abbreviation and number will only tell you which state the bird came into, and that it was imported prior to 1992. Since these birds live such a long time, many are still alive and any birds born 1992 to present were hatched in the US from existing stock. I have contacted the USDA, and I know they could not tell me more than this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.241.97.197 (talk) 19:23, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

mutations have to be reviewed

parino and incomplete ino, are the same mutation,

par=partial, 

also the mutation names better be changed to the standard parrots naming.XP_2600 (talk) 00:06, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Long lived?

I've heard these are long lived birds and was surprised the article says nothing about this. --Marc Kupper|talk 21:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Me too! A small amount of longevity info added. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

The longevity entry says the longest reliably recorded longevity is 4 years. I had a hamster that lived longer than that. Looks like a typo. Perhaps should be 40 years? ~madmax — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.97.133.244 (talk) 20:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)