Done I think. "Captive" is part of the category, though. Should it be "(American kestrel), captive", "(American kestrel, captive)", or "(captive) (American kestrel)"? — Rhododendritestalk | 16:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The scope is not quite right. We do not have scopes of captive birds (i.e. zoo) as opposed to wild birds. But this image could have a valid scope if the anklet/jess or whatever you want to call it is mentioned. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The current scope is good in the sense that captive and zoo are not synonymous. I can see a captive falcon in a 16th century painting it is not in a zoo. The scope describes the content of the image well. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:13, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment My take on this is that where captivity is not visible, it's not a useful scope. In this case, the bird is clearly captive, so the scope seems useful to me. What's the issue with that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Operating under the assumption that Charles' primary objection is that simply "captive" could also apply to any animal that happens to be, say, in a zoo, what about this for another alternative: "...kestrel, with handler"? — Rhododendritestalk | 03:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]