Talk:Palila

Birds Low‑importance

Palila is part of WikiProject Birds, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative and easy-to-use ornithological resource. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Please do not substitute this template.BirdsWikipedia:WikiProject BirdsTemplate:WikiProject Birdsbird

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Birds To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Endemic birds of Papua New Guinea (more)
Cleanup : Bullfinch • Vesper sparrow • Bird flight • Bird bath (more)
Copyedit : Plushcap • Magpie duck • Saker falcon (more)
Expand : Phalarope • Nidicolous • Gouldian finch • Cathartes • Cnemophilidae • Avian malaria (more)
NPOV : Debeaking • Driven grouse shooting • Abu Dhabi Falcon Hospital (more)
Stubs : Cathartiformes • Semiplumbeous hawk • Rainbow-bearded Thornbill • Sunda scops owl (more)
Update : Coal tit • Scottish crossbill • New Caledonian lorikeet • Operation Migration (more)
Verify : Argus (bird) • Blyth's frogmouth • Nik Borrow • Pytilia • Fregata • Chestnut-headed tesia • Darter • Pallid scops owl • Starling (more)
Wikify : Ninox boobook ocellata • The Institute for Bird Populations (more)
Other : Add photos to bird articles needing photos (search Flickr for free images). Add taxonomic authorities to genus articles.

More outstanding tasks at the project's cleanup listing, Category:Birds articles needing attention, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds/Todo.

Hawaii Mid‑importance

	Hawaii portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hawaii on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HawaiiWikipedia:WikiProject HawaiiTemplate:WikiProject HawaiiHawaii
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Animal rights

From the article:

The palila was the first animal to have a 9th circuit federal case cited in its own name. Prior to Palila v. Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources 852 F.2d 1106 (U.S. 1988), cases were cited under the represented party e.g. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife 504 U.S. 555 (U.S. 1992), this citing error opened a door for environmental protection agencies who in prior years had lost on issue of standing, e.g. Lujan. As the Circuit Court Justices so aptly realized, the fact that this bird had “winged itself into court” represented a major stepping stone for animal rights activists.

Firstly, claiming that this is a citing error is questionable. It seems unlikely to me that the judges or lawyers involved would do this accidentally. According to The New York Times the judge explicitly ruled that the species had standing.

Secondly, claiming that this was some sort of victory for animal rights activists is highly questionable. This case was about a species, whereas animal rights activists believe that animals have individual rights. The distinction between a species and an individual is critical here and there's no evidence that I can see that this ruling granted or extended legal rights to any individual bird.

Unless some references can be found for these two controversial claims I will remove them from the article. Pburka (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]