Talk:Release dove

message: The edits made on March 10th were highly objectionable.  They removed a lot of the original text for no apparent reason.  They erased the original explanation of Utility/Performance/Fancy.  They erased the true definition of Duv, and replaced it with their own private definition.  They attempted to push their private interpretation for "reputable" commercial service.  They attempted to present their opinions of Duvs as facts without ever having witnessed an actual Duv.  So much original text was removed, the only choice was to "revert" to an earlier version.  I attempted to identify and use some of the March 10th edits where they made sense.
WynnSmith 10:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People are allowed to post comments on talk pages related to improving the article.  However, it is considered bad form to 'edit' (in the sense of changing) what other people have posted.  Please feel free to respond but do not change what others have said as it could cause other people to misinterpret what someone said.  Also, please sign your posts with ~~~~ (four tildes), this will automaticallky be changed to a user name and a datestamp during save.  This is so we can tell when a post was made and tell which posts are by the same editor and understand the threading of the comments. RJFJR 13:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 10 edits 

message: Most people who keep Release Doves do so for love of the bird.  Nevertheless, they eventually begin releasing birds for friends and family until the day they realize how much they would enjoy operating such a business.  It's the income aspect that qualifies Release Doves for the Utility categorization.
Racing homers come in a variety of colors, but only one form and station.  However, as soon as a breeder begins making breeding decisions based on looks rather than flying performance, as is often practiced with Release Doves, then the strain becomes a Fancy variety.
The word Duv is often used in discussion groups by a number of people and is recognized by White Dove Release Associations such as the NWDRS.
WynnSmith 04:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such thing as a "Duv", this is a ridiculous acronym invented by the author of this thread for self-promotion. Rather than showing his expertise, it shows a severe lack of expertise - the author is simply not qualified. It is not a commonly used term in any aspect of the pigeon or dove fancy, let alone in the dove release industry. This terminology is a discredit to Wikipedia and  should be removed. - Kevin Moore, Arizona Doves.
Kevin, it's important to avoid bias, and I wonder if your dad put you up to this considering his membership in the WDRP.  Duv is not an acronym.  It's a word several breeders use to name something new, just like wiki was a new name for a new thing.  New things need new names and I don't believe "wiki" was invented for self-promotion.  In the case of Duvs, it became obvious that breeding selections that used racing pigeon criteria didn't make sense if a better ceremonial release pigeon could be smaller, tamer, and circle more.  I think it's wrong to display such a strong bias in favor of racing pigeons when the subject of this article is ceremonial release pigeons.  With your knowledge, you could start a wiki article on racing pigeons, and then your opinions would find a better fit with the subject.  BTW, you can press the tilde key four times to sign your name.  WynnSmith 07:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Utility Pigeons are bred for income 

message: Why is capitalization necessary? We don't capitalize animal names. -Wooty Woot? contribs 23:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, got it. -Wooty Woot? contribs 03:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to [[Release dove]]? 

message: The white bird release segment is growing tremendously, and wikipedia provides an important opportunity to educate the public.  It's very important that we say something about each the various types of birds used for white bird releases, including the White Ringneck doves which shouldn't be used at all.
Wooty, is there a reason we shouldn't be explaining "Release Doves" by normal methodologies such as "compare and contrast"?  
WynnSmith 01:17, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comparing and contrasting is fine, but the sections seemed like simply a mini-explanation of other unrelated birds. -Wooty Woot? contribs 03:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Types of White Doves and Pigeons 

message: The most common type of Dove Ceremony is the memorial release, and therefore I restored that section which had been removed.  However, the wedding release ceremony is also very popular and it makes sense to keep simplified descriptions of both types of ceremony.  I don't understand why the most popular type of ceremony was removed.  Can anyone clarify? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WynnSmith (talk • contribs) 01:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Information was removed if it was 1. uncited 2. original research. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, we need reliable sources to verify that those types of releases actually take place. As it is now, nothing but the existence of the breed is verified. This is bad, and leaves it up for a AfD later. I have removed some sections but kept the ones most necessary to the article and with hope of citation with  tags so someone can come along and find sources for them. -Wooty Woot? contribs 03:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed, but the growing thing may be best left out - it may fall under original research. If a notable organization like the ones in the external links were to post "hey, these forums are growing faster, here's some stats", that's definitely fine. But the way sources on Wikipedia should work is that, say, 100 years from now, assuming we're not all dead, someone should be able to look at the article and say "hey, this is right, I can go dig up that (old, granted) book and find it." If no reliable source (100 years from now, will you be able to remember? ;)) can say that the forums grew quickly, it's not advisable to add it. I think a reasonable amount of time to find sources is OK, but usually the way editors deal with it is by removing things that aren't 100% necessary and slapping fact tags on whatever is. Since the article's so new, and I'm sure there's sources somewhere for this, I'll throw my immediatist towel in for the moment and not remove anything. Good luck. -Wooty Woot? contribs 08:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dove Ceremonies 

message: Is this the breed of pigeon that they release when a new Pope is selected? Peter Napkin Dance Party (talk) 21:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Pope 

message: The species is Columba livia, and the common name has not be "rock dove" for a very long time.  The common name is "rock pigeon".  ALL rock pigeons are homers; there is some evidence that selective breeding can enhance this, but it is open to question.  Homing pigeons used for racing, e.g., commonly are mated, and the return-to-home element is enhanced by return-to-mate. This article is based on a whole lot of serious misconceptions and misinformation, and should be purged.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.242.72.221 (talk) 23:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi there! This article is about any breeds or species used as release doves. I can't find any passage here that claims that only certain breeds of C. livia have the homing ability, to which you might be referring. The homing ability of the species is covered in greater detail in homing pigeon. Also, you're right that this article primarily concerns C. livia. The International Ornithologists Union assigned "Rock Dove" as the English common name for this species in 2011 ("Rock Pigeon" being too ambiguous, as it also refers to the genus Petrophassa and even to Columba guinea). Ibadibam (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  SERIOUS ERROR 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion