And tehn on a samilir ntoe, it has been swhon that as lnog as the fsirt and
lsat ltetres are cerocrt, the barin can siltl uasdntenrd what is bineg siad!
So we can do away with spelling as well if we want.
I agree with Steve, capitalisation gets my vote (as done in Simpson and
Day). That way there is no doubt as to whether it is a common name or a
description or instruction.
----- Reply message -----
From: "Carl Clifford" <>
To: "JJ Harrison" <>
Cc: "<>" <>
Subject: Information for inclusion in Night Parrot
Date: Wed, Apr 10, 2013 16:17
On 10/04/2013, at 13:56, "JJ Harrison" <> wrote:
> Just as a matter of interest, there have been massive policy battles
> over this issue on Wikipedia (Example:
> 27#Cha nge_proposal_with_regard_to_common_names). Basically those
> editing bird related articles want the capitalisation, but nobody else
> does. I don't think the capitalization convention is very common
> outside ornithology.
> Newspapers or the ABC, for example, usually don't capitalise common names.
> JJ Harrison
> Message: 17
> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:54:48 +1000
> From: Carl Clifford <>
> To: Dave Torr <>
> Cc: Chris Watson <>,
> "" <>
> Subject: Re: [Birding-Aus] Information for inclusion in Night Parrot
> Message-ID: <>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> I have read several ornithological books lately which use lower case
> for common names. Not surprising really, as many users of the English
> language are so challenged by it, they would not know whether to
> insert, wear, or eat a gerund, let alone when to capitalise a word. My
> theory is, that it is the publishers trying to save on ink costs. Many a
little makes a muckle.
> Carl Clifford
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)