Don't want to see this ad? Sign up...
The selection of vulgar names has a different criterion than scientific names. For the scientific names, the most up-to-date of the chosen taxonomic source are considered (we follow the HBW and BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist), while for the vulgar names the most current ones are not used but the most popular ones. For Argentina, those of the Narosky and Yzurieta 2010 Field Guide, which is the most popular to date, are used especially. This implies that the most accepted, known and expanded names are the names to be used in the records of the species in primary form. In turn, species tokens provide a primary common name and a list of secondary names, where many variants can be added.
Orthography
The correct thing is that vulgar names are written in lowercase, but it is rather accepted that the initial of the noun is written in uppercase and that of the adjective with lowercase. In EcoRegistros we consider it different, our convention is that the name of a species is a proper name, and the proper names are capitalized, so the initial name must be capitalized. The adjective of the name of the species works as a noun of the adjective, so it ceases to be part of the name as an adjective and should be considered as part of the noun, that being a proper name, its initial is also capitalized, with the exception of prepositions and articles that are written in lowercase. For example: Gaviota Capucho Café.
Ambiguities
For species of groups other than Birds, especially in Insects, we prefer to avoid ambiguous names, since many species can share a vulgar name and can confuse inexperienced users who start publishing based on the vulgar name. For example we avoid the name "Beetle" to dry.
The "Common" species
An "anti-common" movement in the name of species is fashionable. What's wrong with being common? I wish all species were common and are not with compromised conservation states. Be that as it may, the words "Común", "Vulgar" or "Common" are distributed worldwide for bird names. Calling "Negrito" to the Common Overlay (Lessonia rufa) and leaving the name of Puneño Overlay to Lessonia oreas breaks the congenital bond of both species of its vulgar name. Although this is not a rule that is always respected, it clearly allows both species to be assimilated to beginners only by the vulgar name. Is it greater gain to change the "Common" in this case and lose the congener bond ?; Or, for example, to call the Common Blackhead (Spinus magellanicus) simply "Blackhead", which generates a specific loss of identity due to the lack of adjective, Blackhead, which of all? Is it better to lack a specific assignment and generate ambiguity? In fact, "Cabecitanegra" in any search engine of a computer system will result in several species.
Internet browsing problem for users with little experience
The site (this and the vast majority) is nurtured / measured by user visits and their rating (whether formal or informal), and most users in general if they do not find what they are looking for quickly tend to abandon the navigation of a site in particular to address another. If we change the vulgar name of most species we lose the link between the species card and the most popular bird guides, since most guides do not resist taxonomic updates for a long time. For example, in EcoRegistros there is a Common Eaglet (Geranoaetus polyosoma) file, with the scientific name updated according to the criteria of the HBW and BirdLife Taxonomic Checklist, that if we changed the vulgar name it would remain as Variable Eaglet (Geranoaetus polyosoma). If a beginner takes the most popular bird guide and looks for the Common Eaglet, he would not find it. Already in this instance many users would give up the search, but consider that it continues, and decides to search by scientific name of the guide (for example Narosky and Yzurieta, 2010), then when entering "Buteo polyosoma" would not obtain results either. If we change the scientific names and also change the vulgar names, we will only generate confusion and frustration in the experience of beginner users, who are precisely the people who are most interested in the effects of environmental education. It is essential for us to continue linking the most popular paper information with the digital one. The search for species by Google also has its problem, since the indexing work takes years within the site, and a change in one of the most important data of the species would negatively impact the search results.
Vulgar names suggested by EcoRegistros
In turn, the popular lists do not contain many of the names of the species that are emerging or "spliteando", so below we leave a summary of the vulgar names suggested by EcoRegistros:
Upucerthia saturatior --> Bandurrita de Bosque (12/03/2012), analyzed with Mariano Costa
Sporophila 'uruguaya' --> Capuchino Manto Canela (04/01/2014), La Grotteria, J. 2015. Reproducción del Capuchino Canela (Sporophila hypoxantha) morfo 'uruguaya' en la provincia de Entre Ríos, Argentina. Nuestras Aves, 60: 11-12.
Patagioenas albipennis --> Paloma Moteada (08/04/2018)
Elaenia sordida --> Fiofío Pardo (08/04/2018)
Leptasthenura berlepschi --> Coludito Quebradeño (08/04/2018)
Colaptes campestris --> Carpintero Barba Negra (08/04/2018)
Colaptes melanochloros --> Carpintero Real Verde (08/04/2018)
Cinclodes antarcticus --> Remolinera Malvinera (08/04/2018)
Penelope bridgesi --> Pava de Monte Yungueña (08/04/2018)
Arremon dorbignii --> Cerquero de Collar Yungueño (12/12/2019), analyzed with Marcelo Gavensky