Talk:Pigeon racing

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Untitled discussion

What on earth is this bizzare little stub doing in Wikipedia? Is there really such a sport as pigeon racing? Is it popular? What is it? Tintenammae 09:42, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it is quite popular, although not as popular as it once was.Abbott75 04:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not bizarre and not a stub either. It's possible that there is other information that might be added, but an article doesn't have to come out at 32k to be other than a stub. Since it seems that the government had problems getting information out of New Orleans and might be expected to have more trouble if nuclear explosions or other pulse weapons destroy radio transmitters and receivers, maybe the federal government ought to support the rearing and "stockpiling" of homing pigeons. P0M 22:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed lots of commercial links have been added to this article. They should be removed. I don't have time to do it tonight, but if you have come here to advertise your own company or your own wage-earning website be advised that commercialization is not in line with Wikipedia policy. Expect commercial links to be removed. P0M 05:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Offending links removed --Abbott75 05:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Major rewrite

I have just rewritten this article. I would appreciate any assistance in improving it in the hope of getting it somewhere near feature article status! --Abbott75 11:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of single line sections, I assume these will be expanded, otherwise they should be merged. A FA also needs a good intro summarising all the important points raised in the article. One other are of interest to me is the ill feeling of the pigeon racing community towards birds of prey - in Britain at least they are often linked to poisonings (though I can find no links to convictions). [1], [2] Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it still needs major expansion. I have just tried to lay the groundwork for this article to be improved to a much higher standard.--Abbott75 01:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kay. I'd try and explain the history a little better, explain how the pigeon posts linked to the development of the sport. Also maybe mention that some pigeon racers bemoan phone towers for mixing up the pigeon's magnetic navigation. Also, how popular is the sport now compared to the past? Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added a hazards section. I'll put more work into it later on, as well as trying to recruit more editors for this article.--Abbott75 04:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"The killing of valuable pigeons by wild predators has led some pigeon fanciers to kill birds of prey": I think this should say that fanciers are suspected of killing birds of prey, or a new source found to back up this statement. Also i noticed some factual errors in the training section. Notably, 6 months training isnt needed, and birds are weaned off when they are 21-25 days old, not 5 weeks old. Also, Id like to add a section detailing racing methods- widowhood, roundabout, Natural, Darkness etc.
Go for your life! Any constructive edit is not only appreciated, but encouraged! Thank you for your edits, by the way. Abbott75 ☺ 10:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets go for a GA

It was a while ago now that I rewrote this article, in the hope of guiding it toward a GA. I would like to thank all the contribtors who improved this article after me. However, There is still more work to be done to get this article the recognition it needs. Reading through it I have noticed that it needs to be wikified, and the tone of the article needs to be made more formal. So please, lets bring on constructive edits and get this article some status! Abbott75 ღ 07:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a good idea. I'll help as I can. Mostly seems to be wikified now? Tag belongs at top of article anyhow. You can nominate it at Wikipedia:Good article nominations under Natural sciences - biology and medicine. Once someone gets around to doing the review they will come and give a list of what needs doing.--Sting au Buzz Me... 07:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm pretty happy with the wikification and have worked a little on the tone. One major improvement that is requred (IMHO) is a good lead section, and that is most certainly not my specialty. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Abbott75 ღ 09:20, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've begun a lead section, but it is in great need of help. So, what are you waiting for! :P Abbott75 ღ 11:30, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whole sections on training, hazards and breeding not mentioned in lead. Jimfbleak (talk) 14:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, shouldn't "one-loft racing" be somewhere near "racing", rather than after "regions"? Jimfbleak (talk) 14:27, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not a GA issue, but why not have a picture of a Peregrine Falcon, a known pigeon-fancier (: under "hazards"? Jimfbleak (talk) 14:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be inclined to remove (web article) from the web refs - not needed. Also last ext link, squab or chick, but ;please not baby! Jimfbleak (talk) 09:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had never even noticed that before. Squab and chick don't seem to 'fit', how about "young pigeon"? Abbott75 ღ 12:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Squab or squeaker are common names used.--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link spam and reversion

I misstated the reason for undoing the last change which was made to this page. I said I thought the links were "cogent" when in fact I meant to say that they were correct in terms of the subject.--Onorio (talk) 02:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asking if pigoens are fowl??

We are having a bout with this and need to now if they are fowl? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.39.131.87 (talk) 20:08, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

Having added sections from press release, this section received an Undue maintenance tag. Now tidied up and balanced discussion, adding more details and citations from outside recent coverage. Please confirm this is now better. 100percentrecord (talk) 13:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I find that the controversy section may need some work and I wonder if others agree. I find that citations 15 & 17 may not be appropriate reliable sources. There may be a need to present all majority and minority viewpoints, if sources exist, to present alternative POVs. Much of the language like "major" and "cruel and unlawful" may need improvement for encyclopedic tone. Much of the language establishes PETA's findings as statements of fact with language like "revealed" or "discovered," when I think it might be an improvement to merely state that they were PETA's findings.
A pigeon racer called me the other day and I felt some of his complaints about the article were valid, so I figured I would at least start a string and see what others felt. User:King4057 23:54, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request edit

I am posting here on behalf of a new editor user:VanceJohn, who has a WP:COI as part of a volunteer-run organization that supports pigeon racing. The suggestion is to remove the following sentence from the Controversy section: "Unwanted pigeons are often killed or abused during training and racing.[17]," which does not appear to be supported by the citation.

While my relationship with Vance is distant and our discussion brief, I felt this one was best left to someone else. User:Corporate Minion 19:14, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than deleting the sentence, I've added a {{Failed verification}} template to it. The source seems as though it may contain useful information for the article, so deleting it entirely would be counter-productive. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:37, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When you say the "source", are you referring to the sentence or the citation? --VanceJohn (talk) 12:20, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The citation - the information about racing pigeons being taken out by peregrines looks like it might be useful. It doesn't, however, support the statement it's being used to cite, and I'd be happy to see that rephrased as something relevant to the source - if you have any suggestions as to how best to use it, I'd be happy to see it changed.
Incidentally, while I respect your decision to avoid any potential conflict of interest (and kudos for declaring it, you'd be surprised how many editors don't), I personally see no problem with you editing the article directly, provided that you follow the advice at WP:COI. If you'd prefer not to, that's fine; I just thought I'd point out that your COI doesn't appear (to me at least) to be sufficiently severe as to prohibit you from editing the article. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:39, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I've now found a better place for the reference (under "Hazards"), so I've deleted the offending sentence entirely. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:45, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Yunshui. I advised him to use request edit, but I endorse a conservative approach to COI. Vance, let me know if there's anything else you would like to improve and I'd be happy to show you the ropes. Corporate Minion 04:57, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect disambiguation page link

First, I can't find instructions on how to post to Talk so I'm copying what I see others doing above.

On the "Pigeon racing" page, search for "unique ses" (it's in the first sentence of the "Traditional timing method" section). The word "ses" is linked to the Se page which is a disambiguation page (I think that's what you call it). There is no relevant entry on that page for ses or se (in other words, no link for the timing). I looked for a good link in places like clock mechanisms but couldn't find one. Can somebody correct this link? Thanks.

- Peter, Los Angeles California, 71.116.252.219, 2013feb05-tu 1141am PST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.116.252.219 (talk) 19:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Refs and pics

There seems to be two reference sections - one in the middle of the article?

Also, I think it would be beneficial to try to find some more "professional" pictures for the article, a lot of the current pics look very amateur and give the sport a bad look in my opinion. The small release at the start of the article could be replaced with a picture of a race birds being released from a truck. The scabby pigeons walking on the ground could be replaced with pictures of well trained, healthy birds in race form in a loft. 220.245.57.250 (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pigeon racing. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:55, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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