Talk:Guineafowl

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untitled

Nice Job Mr JimFBleak!!
I like what you have done to highlite the domesticated guineafowl. I shall run it past the other officers of the GFBA.org perhaps we can tighten it up some more. I see you have a wide interest in ornithology. I commend you for your intent and interest. Feel free to pop in our message board-forum at www.guineafowl.com/board We are 200+ members strong (and growing rapidly) Our message board receives intense interest daily with over 10k viewer hits on average per day with no less than 4 dozen regulars. So please do drop by.

Bigbigbird 16:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Mr. JimFBleak

I am the VP of the GFBA.org (guinea fowl breeders association)

Indeed we are a U.S. based organization but you should also know that we have members in 14 foriegn countries as well. Our membership roster numbers in the hundreds. The group which you are allowing to remain on the guineafowl page is a rogue copycat group which has formed within the last 18 months and has been doing a great disservice to the world at large (as it relates to guineafowl) feel free to visit both groups' webpages and you'll soon have a sense of what I say.

While the GFBA.org has spent nearly a dozen years promoting the benefits of guineafowl, we have also aligned ourselves with the largest breeders (Ralph Winter's Guinea Farm and McMurray Hatchery among many)as well as the leading scientists studying Guineafowl for the benefits of mankind (TSU and MSU)

Certainly we endorse a full description of guineafowl and there was a full description. Indeed it was 'wordy' yet it does express the quirkiness of the bird in question. And though the dialogue/body of the article is not by the GFBA.org, we do none-the-less agree with the contents.

Perhaps between us we can refine the contents of this article and would be happy to do so. But in the meantime, Please stop removing the contents nor our link to our www.gfba.org We have as much rite to be in the links as the "copycat" group. And perhaps more so!


  • Guineafowl Links to a guinea fowl message board, chat room, guinea fowl book, hundreds of photographs and free information about raising guineas.



response from Jim F Bleak

perhaps I should have given my reasons earlier, my apologies for not doing so. I have no objection to your group, I just think the link is on the wrong page. My understanding is that your group is concerned with domesticated Helmeted Guineafowl, not all guineafowl species, and the link should be on the species page, not the family. If the same applies to the other group, that should go from the guineafowl page to Helmeted Guineafowl too. I'll hold off for the present to give you a chance to respond. jimfbleak 04:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Response from BigBigBird

I appreciate that you have no objection to our Organization. The GFBA is the worlds largest online community dealing specifically with all types of GuineaFowl. Indeed when people search out "guineafowl" they generally intend to find "helmeted Guineafowl" Yet our group does include wide interest in all species of fowl. And generally, all guineafowl do share common traits.
Our President and founder is also the author of "Gardening With Guineas" She is also well published in some of the most popular magazines and journals dealing with hobby farming. Recently she was featured on a syndicated TV show as well.
We believe the content as it was entered as late as 4-6-06 (and edited by yourself) we believe was quite acceptable (with minor changes such as clutch size etc)
As far as we understood it, the placement of the links to the external sites was correct. I am not understanding where else they would go.

Please advise.

Bigbigbird 20:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I still have some problems with the article as it stands, because it is unclear whether it refers to Helmeted or all guineafowl. For example, is the clutch size true for all guineafowl, or just Helmeted? Is the nest sharing true of wild as well as farmed birds, and is it true for all guineafowl species? Perhaps the way forward to sort out the confusion might be to put something like
Guineafowl, especially Helmeted Guineafowl, are often domesticated.
Main article Domesticated Guineafowl
and move the domesticated content there. What do you think? jimfbleak 05:03, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim F Bleak

I would tend to agree with your proposed edit on the 'Guineafowl, especially Helmeted Guineafowl, (which) are (most)often domesticated' Yet that should be sufficicient. The species as a whole is often refered to as 'guineafowl' whether you are looking at vulterine, helmeted, or otherwise. The purpose of Wikipedia is to organize thought and direct the curious to related articles and to make it as factual as possible. Indeed all guineas will share a nest or nests until 20 or more eggs are in...and then one or more broody gals will sit on them. This holds true for all domestcated and wild guineafowl. Our source for this info is the research scientists of TSU, 3 of them happen to be native to Nigeria and their research is indisputable on the similarities between wild/domesticated. (note that guineas are really not 'domesticated' as are chickens...they just happen to be a very trainable 'wild' species) Anyways, Jim, We are pleased and happy to work with you to make these articles flow.
as far as the poster below, I would only say "ditto" on the vandalism charge...Removing a GFBA (Guinea Fowl Breeders Association) link without just cause or purpose is tantamount to malicious vandalism as well. The GFBA is well founded in history as the most widely read source for guinea fowl information in the United States as well as Internationally. The upstart group that calls itself GfiA can only dream to have the same success and stature as the GFBA. The GFBA enjoys the support and endorsements of every major poultry college/University and the largest hatcheries in the world as well as countless nationally acredited veterinarians, researchers, And is well thought of in literary circles as well as nationally published journals such as "Mother Earth News", "Backyard Poultry", "Countryside Magazine", and more. Also we are also endorsed by internationally acclaimed author of a "chicken Handbook" Ms. Gail Damerov.
I ask the defender of the GfiA, below, "Can you say that about your copycat club?"

Bigbigbird 14:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


To all concerned,
It is my understanding that both associations are concerned with "all" guineafowl species, and I do think the links to both groups are appropriately placed on this page. I noticed one of the letters in the URL to the Guinea Fowl International Association (the "a" in the word "guinea") had been removed making the link nonfunctional. Unfortunately, I think this was done intentionally, and I will consider vandalism notification if it happens again. Please note that the GFIA is a new organization and has not yet fully developed their web site. New material will be added in the near future.

(Birdsarecool 05:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

To Bigbigbird,
It would be helpful if you would allow this discussion to be viewed in the order that material is written. I would like to note that I was not the one who removed the GFBA link. I do admit that in my attempt to restore the GFIA link to my original wording and correct URL, I returned it to a page that had portions of the text deleted. I corrected that mistake as soon as I realized it. I believe the link to the GFBA was included in both of the pages I edited, so I really don't understand what you are referring to when you talk about "malicious vandalism."
I am not here to defend the GFIA. I realize that such a discussion is not appropriate for this page and that this discussion page is for the purpose of working out problems regarding information included in the Guineafowl article and whether the links supplied are appropriately placed. But, I can assure anyone who has a question about the role of the GFIA that the goal of the new association is to provide accurate information about all species of guineafowl. (Birdsarecool 18:46, 23 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]
It is clear from my research that only Helmeted is domesticated, and I would refer again to my suggestion above that that part of the content is moved tto Domesticated Guineafowl with a link from the main guineafowl. Alternatively, the domestcated bit could go to the Helmeted Guineafowl aarticle. Either is more appropriate than this article. jimfbleak 05:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mr. Bleak, I believe Vulturine are also raised in captivity, although admittedly not in such large numbers as Helmeted.

(Birdsarecool 14:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

OK, fair enough jimfbleak 19:18, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following items are moved from my talk page

This man named BigBird was removed from this organization called the GFBA for trolling their message board as many different identities, and it is entirely possible he is posting here as many different people in an attempt to disrupt this website as well. It is my desire to see all of these references to "mundane discussion" of organizations, in a debating manner as to who is better than whom, be removed from these pages entirely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.211.56.170 (talk) 20:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Tampering on Guineafowl

Hello, I just noticed some rather severe modification to references and links on both the "Helmeted Guineafowl" and "Guinefowl" pages. I do not believe that this user "E-boy" has the authority to dictate that the link to Guineafowl.com and its corresponding description be removed. Nor more so than the link and description to the GFiA that still remains. My intention is to restore the links and references to the dates prior to "E-Boy" meddling with the links and references. It appears that there is favoritism at work by the newer user known as E-boy. Just my opinion. --BigBigbird 13:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jimfbleak, I'd like to strongly dissociate myself from the critique by BigBigbird. First of all, the modifications on the Guineafowl page did not remove any link. I did remove some links from the Helmeted Guineafowl page, because they apply to guineafowl in general and can be found as such on that page. Second, the so-called accusation of favoritism is way out of the line. Moreover, I have tried to fix the favoritism by others and removed biased information such as 'The guineafowl webring and GFBA.org has everything you always wanted and needed to know about Guinea Fowl. All others are mere copycats!', which BigBigbird put back in.
Just to make things clear, I am not involved in any guineafowl organisation. The only thing I wanted to do is improve the wikipedia pages on the guineafowl. I have been doing research to include some valuable content in due time, but after seeing my work go down the drain, I am afraid it is useless to continue with this. --eboy 06:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change request for Guineafowl and Helmeted Guineafowl pages

Hello Jimfbleak and BigBigbird,

I propose the following changes to the links and references on the Guineafowl page:

  • add description to the GFBA link, something like "a non-profit group whose purpose is to promote the guineafowl"
  • remove book review of the "Gardening with guineas" book reference
  • move the link to http://www.guineafowl.com to the "Gardering with guineas" book, as this is what the website seems to be essentially about

I propose the following changes to the links and references on the Helmeted Guineafowl page:

eboy 08:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I'm OK with that, jimfbleak 09:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response To Eboy comments above

Hello Jimfbleak and E-Boy,


First let me point out that the GFBA is Truly proud to be the original and largest authoritative international body dedicated to promoting the benefits of having Guinea Fowl. While based in the United States we are none the less deeply rooted in the International community as well. Our prime and exclusive sponsor is Ralph Winters Guinea Farm...The largest in the world. Our advisors include thge entire staff of the poultry research station located on campus of Tennessee State University and includes Dr. Nahashon, Dr. Adephelope, and other well regarded PhD's who were born in Nigeria and each has a lifetime of experience researching guinea fowl. Also our advisors include the staff of Mississippi State University, Pennsylvania State, Virginia Tech, Texas A&M and several other highly regarded research facilities. Our membership is also international and exceeds 200 members each with vast experiences with guineafowl.

I believe that for the links to be modified by any other than by myself to be tantamount to minor tampering. I agree that we perhaps are a bit boisterous in our descriptors. And I agree that we can work out something a bit more low-key. I stand behind my statement that there was major rework and deletions/edits to the links/descriptions for the book, gfba.org and the guineafowl.com site

I am happy to discuss this further at my email account Jon@gfba.org

I am really very reasonable and easy to work with...simply ask/discuss why before you take a knife to any of above info.

Thanks Jon Shelden, Vp GFBA.org

Bigbigbird 14:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should point out that the statement I believe that for the links to be modified by any other than by myself to be tantamount to minor tampering. has no place on Wikipedia, nobody has ownership, and all are free to edit, and, for that reason, it's discuss, not ask. A description is one thing, a POV statment, including relatively harmless comments about the book is another. If you want to write at more length about the organisation, why not set up an article for it? Thanks for your willingness to talk, jimfbleak 05:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Hello Mr. Shelden,
I am happy for you that you have such a thriving organisation and I think it is great your organisation promotes having guineafowl. However, being vice-president of the GFBA does not give you any more rights on Wikipedia than any other. Please have a quick look at the Policies and guidelines to get an idea how Wikipedia works.
For clarity, I'd like to point out some problems introduced by your last edits:
  • No neutral point of view, i.e. the links and references were biased (being involved in an organisation makes it in principle more difficult to add unbiased content regarding this organisation):
    • The GFBA.org has everything you always wanted and needed to know about Guinea Fowl.
    • Thorough, well written book
  • Try being civil: accusing me of meddling, tampering and favoritism is not productive.
  • Avoid edit wars, such as accusing other organisations of being copycats a number of times.
On top of that, on each edit page there is the following is included:
If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it.
eboy 08:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


any views on the last image - to me, it seems out of place on this page, more a cookery item? jimfbleak 05:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I propose to remove this, since it is irrelevant for this page (this is the reason why I removed it in the first place). It would certainly fit a cookery page, but not a bird page. eboy 08:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the image was in there from long ago. Let me just say I apologize to either one of you if I seem a little crass or egotistical. But realize that the sole intent of our group is to promote ALL aspects of guineafowl...All subspecies included. Being the largest group dealing with this goal we are constantly being mimicked and our intellectual properties plagarized frequently. Thus we have added the debatable POV you reference. No doubt the book is a "source" and I believe that should be understood. I will add the letters (GFBA) to the link on the one reference and will ponder leaving the rest as is. I am no more partial to the GFBA than is "birdsarecool" partial to the GFiA. Right?
As for the cooked meal pic. While not exactly scientific, it is quite a graphical representation of fine French cuisine..."pintade" Yes? I think it gets the point across quite well and has done so for much longer than I have been around on wikipedia. I lobby to leave it as is, since as a source of food, it is a prime category for which many keepers of guineafowl enjoy....including myself.
Bigbigbird 12:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The image of the cooked Guinefowl... looks delicious. Sorry, got distracted. What I meant to say is that it would be better if that image was kept back for the moment until the point where the article was longer and had well balanced sections; range and taxonomy, behaviour, ecology, conservation, domestication., whereupon it would be a useful image to illustate that last section. At the moment, with the article being kind of short and only having one other image, it's kind of jarring on the eye (on the Helmeted page too).It would be useful on a proposed guinefowl domestication article too. Sabine's Sunbird talk 07:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it is very delicious. I am now quite hungry thankyou. I like the picture of the cooked bird. I draws the reader in by utlizing the "taste" sense/trigger. That is a good thing. Certainly the objective is make the article interesting as well as factual. And the cuisine angle does both.
Stepping back for the wide angle on this whole discussion of Guineafowl/Helmeted Guineafowl/or vulturines...I must point out a couple of observations..
1. guineafowl and helmeted guineafowl are very much, interchangeable terms and most commonly descriptive of the dominant "pearl" coloration. BTW, E-Boy, the picture you uploaded is very good. The GFBA has hundreds more too..would it make sense to load a color chart for both the "keets" and adults? Also a thought: We have sound clips of both the female "buckwheat" and male "chee-chee" calls....any thoughts here?
2. no such thing as truly domesticated guineafowl...they are wild creatures that can be somewhat trained with patience.
3. whether they are wild or penned, guineafowl are unlucky in that their flesh is extremely tasty when prepared in various styles.
The professors (core advisors to the GFBA) at TSU are currently investigating guinea fowl as a valuable resource to ease world hunger..check out http://www.tnstate.edu/iager/teams/animal/an_overview.htm
I tend to agree that there are many more aspects of Guineafowl to be explored in further depth. I am also thinking that the article "Helmeted Guineafowl" could be easily merged into "Guineafowl" It is the "helmeted" which is most prevalent both in the wild and in small backyard flocks.
I am truly intrigued that there is so much interest in studying this interesting bird. Bigbigbird 14:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than merge the two articles, which I'm not keen on, why not follow Sabine's Sunbird's suggestion, keeping guineafowl for the group, Helmeted Guineafowl for the wild birds, and something like domesticated guineafowl or farmed guineafowl for the non-wild? There are precedents, eg chicken, domesticated goose and domesticated turkey jimfbleak 15:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking in terms of making it simpler to navigate for the novice interested in learning about guineafowl in general. Helmeted guineafowl are the most prevalent, and are generally identical in all regards whether wild or kept in farming. Also ALL form of guineafowl are found in both wild habitats as well as on farms(vulterines being the much rarer species). The "helmet" is a reference to the boney casque on the head and is identical in wild as well as farm flocks. while the helmeted os a guineafowl, so to are the rarer vulturines. I checked out the "turkey" page and agree "guineafowwl" could be even more in depth. Yet I still see the opportunity to eliminate duplication with all the different pages there is a loss of consistency and occasionally creating contradicting info. And having it all on one page with a neat/orderly index could make it even more enticing for inclusion in the wikiproject-birds Bigbigbird 16:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merging would be a bad idea. Enough research exists to flesh out all the species articles and the family article. People who want information specifically on the helmeted species are going to want to go that page, people who want info on the whole family aren't going to want it biased towards one species. Keep the family page about the family, keep the species page about the species, create a page about domestication and use Wikipedia:Summary style to create concise summaries on the helmeted page and family page that avoid too much duplication and point interested readers quickly in the right direction. Sabine's Sunbird talk 17:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps you are correct! So would there be an index? An opening text and jump off links? I think I see where this could work. but making it happen sounds rather complex. And from what i see on the "turkey" page, doing so would open the door for hundreds of reversions and edits but I guess that is what makes wikipedia interesting! Ok, So I volunteer to help keep the helmeted page in order at least in respect of the verbage. You guys are the experts on the links and taxonomic stuff. And just so I can stress the point some, our gfba org is not specifically all about the helmeted guinea. We support the proliferation of all guinea fowl! So who is going to design this flow chart? I wouldn't mind seeing where this goes Bigbigbird 21:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Wikipedia:Summary style seems the way forward to link to the new domesticated article, and avoids the repetition between the two current articles. I don't think that it will attract the same level of editing as turkey, which has a high profile, and where nobody has really taken it in hand to clean it up. I don't mind setting up the page if no-one else wants to, but I'll leave it for a day or two to see if there are more comments. jimfbleak 05:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Here is my opinion on the above discussion:
  • I think it is not a good idea to merge the guineafowl and the helmeted guineafowl page as this destroys the structure of the taxonomy.
  • Im am in favour of a separate domesticated guineafowl page, like there are for geese and turkeys.
eboy 09:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The descriptions and/or links to the guineafowl book, guineafowl.com and gfba.com are now out of sync on guineafowl and helmeted guineafowl pages. I'd like to fix that, but I don't want to be involved in another edit war. eboy 10:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The GFBA.org also concurs that a seperate heading for "domesticated guinefowl" may be appropriate. There is a tremendous undercurrent in the poultry research community to further the research of the species for more agressive domestication for purposes of food production. There is also a tremendously large group of individuals who are very eccentric about these most endearing wild creatures. The guineafowl characteristics and adaptabilties make it most well suited for many backyard poultry enthusiasts....like myself! Where possible the GFBA will make meaningful contributions both here and upon the lead articles as needed. Hopefully our contributions will be simultaneously material and educational. Kudos to JimfBleak for his efforts and to Eboy for similar efforts and ideas. Also did you know that the feathers of guineafowl are highly sought after by flyfishermen for tying flies?? Bigbigbird 23:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Size

What is their size and weight?? Dogru144 08:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Around 3 1/2 lbs. They look bigger. THey look turkey-sized.

External Link suggestion

Just wondering if the following link would be appropriate for this page: http://www.guineafowlinternational.org/links/index.php#species It leads to a page on the Guinea Fowl International Association website with a collection of links to various pages around the Web with information about the different species of guineafowl. I think it would be a good resource, but I'm hesitant to add it because its inclusion might make it prone to being removed or the URL vandalized (as has happened with the GFIA link in the Domesticated Guineafowl section). However, I feel the wealth of information that can be found at these sites outweighs that concern. Any advice would be appreciated. Birdsarecool 16:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pet Domestication

I had 4 of them as pets, but two died, and they're feral now. -Walkingwith08 (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, I think they are domesticated animals. Where do I add they're status as pets on the list of domesticated animals page, and this page? -Walkingwith08 (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(EDIT:) they are the helmeted kind. -Walkingwith08 (talk) 14:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dumb animals

I think they possibly also rate as about the dumbest animals raised on any farm... Seriously. >.< —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.212.6 (talk) 23:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hybridasation

Dear all,

In my wanderlust browsing I came across the interesting claim that Guineafowl can interbreed with species outside their family. [see wikipedia: hybrid (biology)] However, the page dedicated to Guineafowl does not mention or link to this very unusual information. Due to the high significance of this claim, I tentatively request that the specifics be included. If not, then at least mention why not.

A quick google search reveals Gineahens (Guineafowl X Chicken) and others, most of which do not appear to represent cross-family breeding. Could someone please take this up. Thank you!! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.223.26.131 (talk) 15:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Gamebird_hybrids#Chicken Hybrids. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 23:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bigamy?

According to Wikipedia, "bigamy" is defined as " the act of entering into a marriage with one person while still legally married to another." Is this what guinea-fowl do? fishhead64 (talk) 18:51, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Finding no provision under DOMA for guineafowl bigamy, I made slight modification to the sentence. Derrick Chapman 14:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derrickchapman (talk • contribs)

Thanksgiving

Hi. In the article Thanksgiving, I found this "Most of the U.S. aspects of Thanksgiving (such as the turkey or what were called guineafowls originating from Madagascar), were incorporated when United Empire Loyalists began to flee from the United States during the American Revolution and settled in Canada". Does anyone have an idea as to what animal they are talking about when they say "what were called guinea fowls from Madagascar"? Thanks. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:46, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever wrote that is several kinds of confused. The American bird was named Turkey because Guineafowl were often called Turkey-birds, and they look pretty similar (even more similar to the Ocellated Turkey). It's possible that writer meant to say that guineafowl were eaten at holiday dinners and that was the reason for its replacement, the American turkey, to be eaten at Thanksgiving, but that's a massive stretch. It's not as if the settlers had a lot of options and chose according to tradition when they sat down with the natives, nor that the later 19th century codification of Thanksgiving had eating guinea fowl in mind when they canonized turkey dinners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.204.139 (talk) 04:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

bane to snakes?

I'm not saying, I'm asking, don't they kill snakes? I remember talk from my Mom about how farms with a problem with snakes would "get a flock of guineas". Pb8bije6a7b6a3w (talk) 17:31, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Guineafowl with Blue Spots (Zaire, Africa, 1990)

Hello All,

I saw this bird in Africa (then Zaire) in 1990. The article states that this bird has white spots but the bird I saw had aqua blue spots. I collected several body feathers that were in the same area, evidentally from a guineafowl that had been killed by a wild animal. Does anyone know what species this was?

Thanks, SaturnCat SaturnCat (talk) 08:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As food

The article sys: "It is consumed at Christmas in some parts of Central and Northern Europe (notably in Belgium and the UK). It is also eaten in Italy." This is not an accurate representation. I have never seen guinea fowl as a Christmas food in the UK and, while some people may have this instead of turkey, it is so rare as to be a true minority. It is available year round, though not in large quantities compared with other meats. I don't know about Belgium and Italy, but guinea fowl is a common item (year round) on restaurant menus in France and available in supermarkets. Can someone do some proper research on this? Emeraude (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is available at the the same kind of poultry and game butchers as pheasant and fairly easily obtainable in Bristol Bath area. JDN

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Guineafowl"