Talk:Snowy owl

Nocturnality

Could a comment about time-of-day behaviour be added to the introduction?

I taught the word owl, including the concept of nocturnality, using the snowy owl as an example (in spite of the evidence of many pictures)!

Sbioggio (talk) 02:32, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758) Male.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758) Male.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 13, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-02-13. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Snowy owl
The snowy owl (Bubo scandiacus) is a large, white owl of the typical owl family. Snowy owls are native to Arctic regions in North America and Eurasia. Males are almost all white (as seen here), while females have more flecks of black plumage. Juvenile snowy owls have black feathers until they turn white. The snowy owl is a ground nester that primarily hunts rodents and waterfowl and opportunistically eats carrion.Photograph: Michael Gäbler
Archive – More featured pictures...

Wording

"largest owl species of owl" -> largest species of owl, please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oneyb (talk • contribs) 12:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oneyb, done.[1] Thank you.--Eostrix (talk) 08:51, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

The word "Bubo" in the phrase 'The genus name Bubo is Latin for the Eurasian eagle-owl and scandiaca is New Latin for Scandinavia' is lacking of context. On the other hand, the word "Strix" is what matters here and apparently means screech of owl in Latin language 78.130.23.145 (talk) 16:07, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sentence should be re-written

"When perched Snowy owls often face the sun, which has been suggested to represent a visual display across long distances in open habitats."

Is this sentence saying that someone has "suggested" that the sun offers a visual display acrosss long distances? I'm pretty sure it does. I'm sure the author of it meant something else... but what? GeneCallahan (talk) 15:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph in opening section needs to be split

It's much too long. Could anybody please recommend a good sentence, probably two, where it should be split?

(Edit: I think a good place would be the sentence starting with "[m]ost owls ..." and "[t]he snowy owl is a nomadic bird ..." Could anyone please tell me if these are good places?)

(Edit: First sentence of previous edit note should started "I think two good places would be the sentences ..." Sorry about that; I forgot to edit it after I added the second example of where to possibly split the paragraph.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 19:51, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Thylacine24: Be bold. What you say makes sense. Make the changes and explain your reasons for them in the edit summary. Someone might disagree, but then it can be discussed. We are all volunteers. SchreiberBike | ⌨  21:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SchreiberBike: Thanks, but I'm not usually very bold when it comes to edits like splitting paragraphs. So, could you please tell me if you personally think that the sentences I suggested were good places to split the paragraph?--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:50, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Thylacine24: Yes, I think that would work well. SchreiberBike | ⌨  02:16, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@SchreiberBike: Thanks, I'll make the change, then.--Thylacine24 (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thylacine24, good job. You can be bold, worse case you'll be reverted or have a successive improvement by someone else.--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 13:14, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Typo (migatory should be migratory)

This is a protected article, so I can’t edit directly, but could someone fix this? Commietaku (talk) 16:01, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prey size

One study estimated for the biomes of Alaska and Canada, mean prey sizes for snowy owls were 49.1 g (1.73 oz), in western North America, the mean prey size was 506 g (1.116 lb) and in eastern North America was 59.7 g (2.11 oz), while the mean prey size in northern Fennoscandia was similar (at 55.4 g (1.95 oz)).

The Western NA section seems very high in context - should it be 50.6g? The source is online ([2]) but I don't have access, unfortunately, and the print copies in my library don't have that year.

@Sandhillcrane:, I think this was your edit - I don't suppose you still have a copy of the source to confirm? Andrew Gray (talk) 12:41, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2024

2403:580D:FDDC:0:F5DB:7F89:C443:501E (talk) 23:29, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

happy birthday to the snowy owl there birthday is 15th of September

 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. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 00:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New lead image proposal

I'm proposing a new lead image for snowy owl. This is the file of the adult to replace the juvenile one: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bubo_scandiacus_male_Muskegon.jpg.Protector100 (talk) 13:45, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to add the image to the article if you feel it improves the article. However the lead image you have replaced, twice, is a picture of the day, featured picture and quality image. It is an action shot that depicts a Snowy Owl with prey. This image has been featured in periodicals, science articles and even on a Japanese Television show (in 2014.) Its a much more compelling image than the lower resolution shot (VGA quality) you propose which also lacks contrast, sharp focus and includes significant noise, and depicts a static subject. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 20:03, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New lead images

Hello! This is a note to the editors that I am proposing two snowy owl images (male and female) as new lead images: File:Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758) Male.jpg and File:Snowy Owl - Schnee-Eule.jpg. Both images have high resolution, and the quality of both is good as well. The male image, File:Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758) Male.jpg, is also picture of the day, as well as featured picture. They will replace File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg as lead images. I don't whether the owl of File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg is juvenile or adult female as they look almost the same. Plus, the image under prey spectrum section, File:Snowy Owl Black Duck Wings Open.png, looks the same to File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg except earlier action. I don't know if there's rule against having two similar images in the same article. Anyway, the image File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg will take over File:Snowy Owl Black Duck Wings Open.png, since File:SnowyOwlAmericanBlackDuck.jpg is featured picture and picture of the day. Protector100 (talk) 04:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just stop. You have repeatedly made edits that are reversed. Your edits verge on Wikipedia:Edit_warring at this time. You made a request on March 26. No one supported your request. I replied, but one else chimed in. You have removed a QI, FP, POTD image and replaced it with one good image and with another image that is barely above VGA resolution. (A 532x750 pixel image.) I am reversing your edits. You are the only one that has an issue here. If you want to get a consensus then wait until someone else on the talk page chimes in to support your position. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please calm down. I'm just trying to help. Just forget about the request I made on March, because I do not know the reason at that time until you said about QI, FP and POTD. If you want QI, FP, POTD image, please look at this one again File:Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758) Male.jpg. I already said that the male image is FP and POTD image. And for QI image, I have a new one for female File:Schneeeule Bubo scandiacus Grugapark 2013.jpg. It is QI image, and it's above VGA resolution (1,949 × 2,599 pixels). Your QI, FP, POTD image. I don't know if the owl is juvenile or adult female. The point is: Did you even get consensus for your image to be the lead image? Did you even place your request last year on August? Never mind, I will also put it in the dispute. And also please, nothing is perfect.Protector100 (talk) 01:07, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is not the image you posted, but it is similar. Thank you for taking this to the dispute resolution. I hope that they can assist us both in improving the article. Please do not upset the status quo until other parties have stepped in to offer their opinions and guidance on what the best option are for a high quality article. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please just post your message to me in here, not my talk page. I may come over to look.Protector100 (talk) 12:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please at least not removing the POTD, QI, FP images from the article itself if you don't want them to replace your image as lead images, which I don't even remove it from the article at all? The male image had been the lead image since before 2014.Protector100 (talk) 12:46, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I already placed the dispute in the dispute resolution noticeboard, you may come over. Protector100 (talk) 02:11, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The images should be left at the ante bellum status quo pending the resolution of the dispute. I left a new message on your talk page about WP:3RR. There are processes to avoid edit wars. Please review wikipedia's policies and allow those processes to play out. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 13:54, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image compromise

After working through dispute resolution a compromise was reached by two editors. Prior to making a change to the lead image, please consider adding a topic to the talk page for discussion to avoid future edit wars. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Planning to launch a RFC on lead image arrangement

Greetings. I have an announcement. It's about the current lead images of the snowy owl page. Although image 1 is a featured picture and picture of the day, the identity of the owl itself is currently unknown, either a subadult or female owl. The image 2 being the adult male. I'd like to make a suggestion: adult male as image 1 and owl with duck as image 2. Just to follow the examples of certain articles of animals where image one is male. RFC is needed for this. Anyone feel free to join in the discussion, and if you are okay with it, then a new RFC will be launched. Protector100 (talk) 03:02, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You and I have gone back and forth about this numerous times. We had a dispute resolution, we reached an agreement, and now you want to reopen a debate that was already settled. We came to terms and then you violated the terms of that agreement. You admitted so on my talk page.
Wikipedia is a community. Other people can comment and provide input.
Please understand, in order for an image to became a Picture of the Year finalist, it requires a lot of votes from the community. The image passed the first round of voting and was the 3rd highest ranked wildlife image in the voting, one vote behind the second place wildlife photo.
That means hundreds of Wikipedia's voted that this image is in the highest echelon of photos on Wikipedia.
It is was a picture of the Day in Vietnamese Wikipedia, it is scheduled to be a Picture of the Day next year. It has received accolades from other Wikipedia users in large numbers.
In addition, please examine the range map for Snowy Owls - [3]
Most people who see them are going to see younger owls that push further south into populated areas. Adults can stay further North. Breeding grounds are remote, many adults stay close to these circumpolar locations. In irruptive years immature Snowy Owls push South. - "During irruptive years, Snowy Owls can flush south throughout the lower 48 states, as far as south as Texas and Florida in extreme years." (Cornell Lab of Ornithology)
An person is much more likely to see an immature Snowy Owl than an adult - and an adult female and an immature Snowy are nearly identical. Therefore this image helps with the identification better that that of an adult male.
It is very likely that this specimen is a sub adult, but it could also be an adult female. Regardless, the difference is not significant as you would need the birds DNA to know for sure. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 04:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I only agreed if the image one is adult male. I did made the offer by giving suggestion that image one be adult male and image two be subadult/adult female. Protector100 (talk) 06:38, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"An person is much more likely to see an immature Snowy Owl than an adult - and an adult female and an immature Snowy are nearly identical. Therefore this image helps with the identification better that that of an adult male" - No, I don't think so. Because an adult male is mostly white with few spots.Protector100 (talk) 06:42, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are very difficult to communicate and tend to be ultracrepidarian. How much do you know about Snowy Owls? How much experience do you have with them? How do you reach a conclusion such as that? What brought you to this page and to take such an unwavering position on these images?
Population density and the overlap of the Snowy Owl's range determines the odds of a person seeing a wild Snowy Owl. Adult Snowy Owls stay further North in their range. Younger owls, particularly in irruptive years, push further South. Understand that in the breeding grounds the Snowy Owl is diurnal. And in Winter, there is little to no sun in Northern and circumpolar ranges. Younger Owls move to where they don't have to compete with other Snowy Owls and where they have the benefit of sunlight during a considerable portion of the day. Significantly more people live in these climatic regions.
A person in a populated area is significantly more likely to see an immature Snowy Owl than an adult. And if they were to see an adult, its roughly a 50 / 50 chance it would be female. Therefore, mathematically, statistically strictly using probability - a person is much more likely to encounter a Snowy Owl in the wild that looks like the lead image 1 as it stands now then to see an all white adult male.
You cannot refute this fact. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please, don't start those things again. I heard enough of the stuffs like "how many accolades the image received", "Vietnamese Wikipedia", and "snowy owl range". Then you should also know that snowy owl is listed as vulnerable by the ICUN. And that the climate change is widely perceived as the primary driver of snowy owl decline. About the male owl image, it was used as the lead image since 19 November 2012, up until June 2020. Nearly 8 years. And it was named as the FP and POTD in February 2018. You may blame the people who named it FP and POTD in the first place. What do you have against snowy owls in captivity? Do you know that Snowy owl captivity efforts primarily focus on rehabilitation, research, and breeding programs within licensed institutions like zoos and raptor centers? You can get a closer look at the snowy owls, whether they are male, female, or immature owl. The keepers can tell differences between adult females and immature owls by checking DNA, which is easier to access in captivity. And take a look at the articles of Andean condor and mandrill, whose lead images depicted them in captivity. If you are such a capable image uploader, then I suppose you are a good photographer. Why don't you take a picture of a wild snowy owl yourself. I don't live in the Western part of the world, and I don't own expensive cameras. Shall I remind you that not everyone is a fan of owls, not to mention snowy owls. Take the Africans etc, they see owls as ill omens due to superstitious beliefs. I think you are a little carried away for the accolades your image received. I made that suggestion is not for identification or showing off, but for following the rules, where the male images of certain species like lion, Andean condor, moose, and mandarin ducks are images 1. The only person I blamed the most is myself. All of these arguments is due to my indecisiveness. I let you decide at that time is because I want it to resolve peacefully and I don't know if you agree to my suggestion. Also, I joined Wikipedia last year, and there are some things I don't know. If I done the edits according to my suggestion on May, I don't know if I am subjected to WP:3RR. I think the best way is to open up a new DRN then. Sorry for all this, if I do hurt you with my words, I apologise. Protector100 (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:Protector100 I want to keep this discussion focused on policy, prior agreements, and verifiable information. To make sure we are both working with the same facts, I’m going to clarify the history of the dispute and address the policy and logical issues that have come up.
If you have not read them already, read about the The five pillars of Wikipedia, along with the other articles that User:Robert McClenon suggested for OUR review, it’s a great starting point on your Wikipedia journey.
1 - Prior Agreement:
Quote #1 (from My Talk Page) - "But if it really means that much to you, then owl with duck as image 1 and adult male as image 2. You decide. This will be settled without Rfc then. - Protector100 (talk) 14:41, 30 May 2025 (UTC)"
Based on that agreement, I made the changes we discussed and documented the outcome on the article talk page so future editors would understand that the dispute had been resolved.
Snowy Owl Talk Page. - After working through dispute resolution a compromise was reached by two editors. Prior to making a change to the lead image, please consider adding a topic to the talk page for discussion to avoid future edit wars. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
Later, on 17 June, you changed the lead image again without starting a talk-page discussion, which reopened the dispute. Under Wikipedia:Consensus, reopening a settled issue requires new arguments or new information. No such new information has been provided.
2 - No Requirement For Male To Be Image #1:
Quote #2 - "I made that suggestion is not for identification or showing off, but for following the rules, where the male images of certain species like lion, Andean condor, moose, and mandarin ducks are images 1." - Protector100 (talk) 03:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)
As you can see in my responses to you, I have cited sources.
For clarity, there is no Wikipedia policy, guideline, or style recommendation that requires a male animal to be lead image. Examples from other articles fall under Other Stuff Exists and are not evidence of a rule.
The relevant guideline is MOS:Images, which asks for a representative and high-quality image in the lead.
Current Image 1 is Representative and Suited for the Lead Image
3. Why the Current Image 1 is well-suited:
My argument about the range map is specifically about this being a representative image. Please consider these other verifiable, ecological facts about the species:
1) If you overlay the Snowy Owl's range with populated areas a person is far more likely to see a young Snowy Owl in the wild, than an adult.
2) If an individual sees an adult in the wild, adult males are significantly less common.
3) Female and subadult Snowy Owls look the same, and they look like the current lead image 1.
4) Snowy Owls are diurnal. The young push south to areas with more sunlight as they learn to hunt. On their breeding grounds, there is between 20 and 24 hours of sunlight. - Why is this relevant? Because this is why Snowy Owls have yellow eyes. Image one catches those eyes, and this field mark, in full light. The captive bird image does not adequately reveal this detail.
5) Relative size - Size is hard to determine without something a viewer recognizes to compare it to. The black duck provides that size reference.
These points directly address ’’’representativeness, quality, and encyclopedic value,’’’ which are the relevant considerations under MOS:Images. It is of extremely high quality and 4.5x the resolution of Image 2.
4. Dismissing Arguments Without Engagement:
When points such as image quality, community review, species distribution, and representativeness are repeatedly set aside with comments like:
Quote #3: I heard enough of the stuffs like "how many accolades the image received", "Vietnamese Wikipedia", and "snowy owl range".
This bears a similarity to the behavior described at a refusal to get the point. Arguments are being dismissed without being addressed. For consensus to work, all policy-based arguments need to be engaged with.
5. Personal attacks and/or Irrelevant Arguments:
In your recent comments you raised topics such as:
  • your access to equipment
  • owl captivity programs
  • cultural beliefs about owls
  • that I should be glad my image is one of the main images
  • whether I am “carried away” by the image’s community reception
These topics do not relate to image selection criteria and can be distracting from the policy issues. Per WP:NOTABOUTYOU and WP:Focus On Content, article content discussions should remain focused on sources, accuracy, and guidelines—not on personal circumstances or motivations.
6. Image Assessment
To clarify, the assessments of the image’s quality are not based on my personal opinion. They come from formal Wikipedia community processes. The image was promoted to Featured Picture, selected as Picture of the Day on multiple language Wikipedias, and placed highly in Picture of the Year voting. These evaluations reflect ‘’’consensus’’’ from independent editors participating in established quality-control workflows. I mention these not as personal accolades, but because they demonstrate that the image has already been reviewed and endorsed by the community as meeting high encyclopedic standards, which is directly relevant to MOS:Images, and to determining representative, high-quality lead content.
7. Conclusion:
Given the prior mutual agreement in May, the documented implementation of that agreement, and the absence of new policy-based arguments or new information, the current image arrangement represents the status quo. Per Wikipedia:Consensus, reopening a settled issue requires new evidence or policy justification, and the burden is on the editor seeking the change to provide that. I remain open to any new information that relates directly to the content policies or to the guidelines on representative lead images. Until such arguments are presented, the existing consensus should remain in place. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The case is closed. Protector100 (talk) 06:56, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Map display

When the range map is enlarged, the legend doesn’t display. ~2026-12920-1 (talk) 08:00, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The legend is not a part of the image; it is a caption. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Snowy_owl