Talk:Peregrine falcon

Merge from Shaheen Falcon

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closing as no consensus to merge. Safiel (talk) 05:45, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

---

Extended content

The benefit of splitting one subspecies as a separate article is negligible. Apart from the description the only way in which it differs is in a bigger cultural element, which could be easily included in the main species article. Shyamal (talk) 07:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Support There doesn't seem to be a case for it being a potential different species, so merge per nom Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

• Very weak oppose It's already got the longest description of a subspecies in Peregrin Falcon, and merging new info from when this proposal was made would probably double that length. I also just added a bit more, not to complicate the issue, but just as I stumbled across information trying to verify some of the basic facts in the subspecies article. (It has some verifiability issues). It could also stand to have some info added on the different types of the subspecies, which are geographically separated and morphologically distinct; 19th century drawings of at least two types exist in Commmons. While it wouldn't affect my opinion on splitting or merging, older sources I read (2002-2007) suggested the taxonomy was still controversial. Agyle (talk) 09:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

The trouble is that there are several subspecies of F. peregrinus and in terms of article structure it is unwarranted to fork just one subspecies peregrinator. While Wikipedia has a rule on automatic notability for species, there is no such provision for subspecies. A lot of the description here could well apply to other subspecies. This fork is actually quite unreliable. That claim that peregrinator is migratory is only supported by that Forktail paper which is an unreliable source that contradicts all the reliable sources of regional avifauna (see for instance Ali & Ripley's Handbook) and it seems more like an oversight. The only real classification debate is whether pelegrinoides should be separated or not and it would seem like there is little doubt that they all form a tight species complex that makes it problematic only if the falconry classification is considered. This article is actually a lot like the Pukeko fork from the Purple Swamphen except that that attempts to be distinct as something dealing purely with cultural association. Forks like these tend to gather nationalistic trash, in fact the reason I saw this was because of an Indian newspaper which carried a picture captioned "national heritage bird of Pakistan" - just one bit of misinformation that would never have been allowed if it had been inserted into Peregrine Falcon... and now proliferating on the web. Shyamal (talk) 11:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I think what warrants the split is that the amount of coverage in Shaheen Falcon would seem disproportionately long in Peregrine Falcon. If you think Shaheen Falcon fails to meet notability standards for an article, that's another question; I think it meets WP:GNG. These are just subjective opinions though.

Regarding misinformation lasting longer in Shaheen Falcon than it might in Peregrine Falcon due to fewer followers, I wouldn't consider that in a split or merge decision.

I'll reply to discussion of Shaheen Falcon content on its Talk page. Agyle (talk) 03:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not notice that it was your addition. The section on peregrinator in Peregrine Falcon correctly notes it as resident. In general the temperate zone populations are migratory. Most of the length of the Shaheen article would go away either because it is uncited or because it is common information that works across subspecies and probably already mentioned. Shyamal (talk) 12:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

389 km/h !!!!!

I don't understand why are here accepted jokes such a '389km/h' launched in tv programs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.198.15 (talk) 13:59, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

It's not a joke, it's according to the cited source. 242 mph = 389 km/h (largely due to free fall acceleration, I think). Brandmeister^talk 14:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

If it is no scientific, it is a fraudulent JOKE, of course very welcome in TV programs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.102.119.216 (talk) 14:17, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

It is scientific, not fraudulent, not a joke. It's been measured. So don't troll. -- 184.189.217.210 (talk) 06:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peregrine falcon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110614100455/http://www2.ucsc.edu/scpbrg/nestcamSF.htm to http://www2.ucsc.edu/scpbrg/nestcamSF.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150502230041/http://upp.hawkandowl.org/norwich-peregrines/norwich-cathedral-peregrine-live-web-cam-2015/ to http://upp.hawkandowl.org/norwich-peregrines/norwich-cathedral-peregrine-live-web-cam-2015/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peregrine falcon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110808213721/http://www2.ucsc.edu/scpbrg/captive_breeding.htm to http://www2.ucsc.edu/scpbrg/captive_breeding.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peregrine falcon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160623011828/http://www.ttbook.org/book/werner-herzogs-required-reading-peregrine to http://www.ttbook.org/book/werner-herzogs-required-reading-peregrine
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706164645/http://www.arcticraptors.ca/ to http://www.arcticraptors.ca/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:19, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peregrine falcon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170908020348/http://kabotarnews.com/peregrine-falcon/ to http://kabotarnews.com/peregrine-falcon/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:14, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Possible resource

Just became aware of this paper Intraspecific evolutionary relationships among peregrine falcons in western North American high latitudes that may be of some use here. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Prairie-Peregrine-Hierofalcon

The Prairie falcon can be(?) closer to the Peregrine than to the Hierofalcons, but the Peregrine is closer to the Hierofalcons than to the Prairie falcon (see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331118392_Phylogeny_of_Falconidae_and_phylogeography_of_Peregrine_Falcons and https://sciendo.com/downloadpdf/journals/orhu/26/2/article-p27.xml).83.132.96.185 (talk) 23:24, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Wrong image

The first image is NOT of a peregrine falcon.

Fastest visual processing claim was wrong

The introduction previously said "According to one study, it has the fastest visual processing speed of any animal tested so far, and can register discrete changes up to 129 Hz", citing a News Nation article. However, their source is this study, which doesn't say that at all. They only measured 3 species of falcons, and found the peregrine falcon to have the fastest flicker fusion frequency of those three species. They then compared those numbers to others in the ornithology literature, where several smaller birds had even faster vision (see figure 3 for example), including 138.2 Hz for the pied flycatcher. They note that generally smaller animals and animals with higher metabolic rate have faster vision. According to Vogel 1956, houseflies have a flicker fusion frequency around 270 Hz, much higher than the peregrine falcon. I have therefore removed this claim and reworded the section. Amaurea (talk) 01:07, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• 2007 ID Proof Rev.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:43, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible additional information about eggs?

Watching the Berkeley peregrines with fascination, but I wanted to know two facts. What are the typical period of laying of eggs (time from 1st to last) , and what is the typical period of hatching (time from 1st to last). Hopefully someone can access that information or point me to it. I'll be happy to add it to the article. Bastique ^{☎ call me!} 17:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Spoken article

I've decided to record a spoken article of this page. Bastique ^{☎ call me!} 19:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

240, not 200.

The information on the peregrine falcon says that they can stoop at 200 miles per hour. I learned the fastest speed recorded was 242. Can you please change it? EAGLITIZED (talk) 00:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a WP:SOURCE? Mr Fink (talk) 01:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

The article already mentions that 242 mph recording, both in the main text and the lede. The general estimate of over 200mph is stated and then recording of the higher value is mentioned in both places, with references. —  Jts1882 | talk  07:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Speed (stoop), concerning “the highest reliably measured speed being 184 km/h (114 mph)”

Some claim top stoop speeds of about 400km/h obtained from a device based on GPS, by when the bird passes through variations in relief, the GPS' margin of error gives rapid variations in position that it will interpret as very high speeds. However, when radar track is used we do not find top stoop speeds of more than about 200 km/h.

In (1987) Radar observations of the stoop of the Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus and the Goshawk Accipiter gentilis (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1474-919X.1987.tb03207.x/pdf) a WILD Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) was recorded stooping at 140 km/h and a Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) at 108 km/h. HOWEVER, the highest recorded speed (see last statment of the paper) was from a Merganser (Mergus serrator) at 43,2 m/s (156km/h) during 10 s. This later, in despite de fact that reach the maximum recorded speed during the work that the paper concerns, is not even mentioned in the abstract, which an example more of the bias that has been made in favor of the peregrine falcon myth of fastest bird.

In (1998) Stoops of peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus and barbary falcon F. pelegrinoides [Sturzfluge von Wanderfalke Falco peregrinus und Wustenfalke F. pelegrinoides] "Two stoops of Peregrine Falcons and two of Barbary Falcons were measured with a tracking radar. For the Peregrine Falcons, total altitude losses while diving were 250 m and 350 m. Steepest diving angles amounted to 42° and 40°, respectively. Maximal air speeds of 36 and 51 m/s (130 and 184 km/h) were recorded. For the Barbary Falcons, the corresponding values are height losses of 173 m and 189 m, diving angles of 20° and 34°, and maximal air speeds of 42 and 44 m/s (150 and 158 km/h). The 51 m/s (184 km/h) of a Peregrine Falcon represents the highest air speed of a bird accurately measured so far."

In (2017) Hunting flight speeds of five southern African raptors (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2989/00306525.2018.1455754), maximum speed recorded for a Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) was 196km/h, in a artificial intended experience in order to obtain high speeds in stoops of them. Since falcons and eagles (and most of birds) have aerodynamic bodies, their maximum speed in a stoop depends essentially of the plumage hardness, i.e. how close it is to a rigid body. In other words, if the plumage is soft, with no firmness, the top speed in a stoop is (especially for large birds and more precisely for large Reynold's numbers) much below the terminal speed of a rigid body of the same weight and size [which is about 180km/h for small passerines and about 400 or 500 km/h for a 1kg bird -- cf. (2001) Field estimates of body drag coefficient on the basis of dives in passerine birds, and, (1998) Speed and acceleration of ideal falcons during dive and pull out -- noting that in the title the words "ideal falcons" should be replaced by "ideal birds", since that refers to any bird shaped like a streamlined bird].

In conclusion, these is NOT evidence at all that large birds with very firm plumage not reach higher speeds than Peregrine falcons. In particular the large loons (Gavia) that have very oily plumage, as they live in cold waters, or, the largest Gyrfalcons (Falcon rusticolus) that are like giant peregrines, or even some large eagles. Very important: We cannot follow a criterion of searching, based on genetics/species, but rather on ecological characteristics. For example, most Gyrfalcons that live further south (northern Europe) of their range, have soft plumage and are not well-equipped for stooping, and this can be seen in their obvious goshawk-like appearance. To look for the fastest ones, we have to get well into their range map, where they don't have competition from peregrines in the toughest part of the year (peregrine falcons will only be there in the summer, to breed taking advantage of the overabundance of waders).

In what concerns at least Peregrine falcons, adult/old individuals have much more rigid feathers than young ones and therefore are much more configured for reach high speeds in stoops. [On the other hand, the opposite is true with some populations of buzzards (Buteo), where the adults look very similar to owls and increasingly specialize in rodents.] 94.133.170.174 (talk) 23:45, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Read up man

Gosh whoever changing the picture in wikipedia please read up what is the peregrine falcon and what are the subspecies of it? Mossleegermany (talk) 18:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

The bird pictured is noticeably darker (almost melanistic) compared to most normal peregrines and is therefore not a good representative of the species as a whole. McMadagascar (talk) 17:44, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Clearly you are wrong 58.182.166.162 (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I agree with @McMadagascar that the current photo is a better image for the infobox. Schazjmd (talk) 19:04, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

I also agree with @McMadagascar, as the current photo shows the markings typical for the species, and we could do without the other picture of the melanistic female butchering prey. Mr Fink (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

7th image captioned with incorrect information

The bird in this image https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Falco_peregrinus_nest_USFWS.jpg is not an adult. See molt limit on coverts. It is either a second year bird (depending on the date of this photo) or (well, it is also) a bird going from first cycle plumage into second cycle. It doesn't match the field marks for F. tundrius, at all. The caption could read- Immature bird, possibly F. pealei though see "Recovery efforts" section -rudyard (talk) 05:20, 9 August 2025 (UTC)

Slight inconsistency between “Speed” and “Feeding” subsections on topic of max speed

The inconsistency between these two subsections should probably be rectified.

Relevant excerpts:

Speed Subsection

A study testing the flight physics of an "ideal falcon" found a theoretical speed limit at 400 km/h (250 mph) for low-altitude flight and 625 km/h (388 mph) for high-altitude flight.[59] Some sources state that the peregrine falcon can reach over 320 km/h (200 mph) during its stoop,[19] which would make it the fastest animal on the planet.[60][61][62] According to a National Geographic TV program, in 2005 Ken Franklin recorded a falcon stooping at a top speed of 389 km/h (242 mph).[63][64] Other sources state that radar tracks have never confirmed these kinds of speeds, with the highest reliably measured being 184 km/h (114 mph).[65]

Feeding Subsection

As of 2018, the fastest recorded falcon was at 242 mph (nearly 390 km/h). Researchers at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands and at Oxford University used 3D computer simulations in 2018 to show that the high speed allows peregrines to gain better maneuverability and precision in strikes.[86] YannLK (talk) 18:54, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

By this I mean the uncertainty in the speed section doesn't match with the certainty of the high claim in the feeding section. YannLK (talk) 19:00, 2 June 2026 (UTC)