Talk:Columbidae

message: I have edited the Description section to be a bit more organized and added some material with reference. Please let me know what you all think and if you have any suggestions for further improvement.
RameyEA (talk) 06:37, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description Section 

message: I believe studies of pigeon cognitive ability have revealed some interesting facts, among them that they seem to do better with the "Monty Hall" problem than humans.
Perhaps this and under studies should be mentioned in a "Pigeon Cognition" section.--Jrm2007 (talk) 04:19, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intelligence Section? 

message: I've flagged the Taxonomy and systematics section as confusing because it starts talking about specific drinking behaviour of Columbiformes without introducing the concept.  I am not an expert in this area and so I am simply flagging it as an issue. cuttellhell 02:04, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing information in 'Taxonomy and systematics' 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Columbidae. 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/20130131120659/http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/enduring-doves.asp to http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/enduring-doves.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:27, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article cites John H. Boyd III's website which is a self-published tertiary source. Although it is an interesting site that discusses recent phylogenetic publications it is not a suitable source for the phylogeny of birds in wikipedia articles. Boyd lists some of his sources and these should be consulted and cited. I note also that Boyd likes to speculate and go beyond the published data as he explains:
"My approach contrasts with most checklist committees. They usually put substantial weight on traditional classifications, and try to avoid speculation, even when its clear that the traditional classification is wrong. In particular, they try to avoid making erroneous changes, and put a premium on stability."
"This checklist has a different purpose. It exists to speculate, to map out potential changes in the taxonomy. The price of focusing on speculation is to give up stability."
and
"The instability of the TiF worldlist may make it unsuitable for everyday use, although it should serve the useful function of highlighting potential changes regardless of your preferred checklist."
So in addition to the website being a self-published source, the approach is not suitable for wikipedia articles where we avoid speculation and value consensus and stability.  -Aa77zz (talk) 10:02, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree. To quote WP:SPS: "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." From what I can tell Boyd's professional expertise lie in economics, not taxonomy (or any other related field) so his self-published work should not be considered reliable regardless of his aims. Alphathon /'æɫ.fə.θɒn/ (talk) 12:35, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

text: As replacement for the cladogram per Boyd, there's Soares et al. 2016, which contains an apparently full cladogram for Columbidae. The one drawback I can see is that none of the branches of that cladogram have anything more than provisional names. Given the current state of the Raphinae article, that may not be a bad thing, though. Esoteric bearcat (talk) 02:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  John H. Boyd III 

message: There is no sane explanation as to how this gobbledygook became all by itself the very singular standalone title of this page. Change it back ASAP.  
It is only an indication of how pervasive the extremist geeky editing has become on Wikipedia that is not just out of touch with reality but tramples on Wiki-editing rules and regulations in both letter and spirit.
This gibberish fails to meet even one of the 5 criteria:
:-Recognizability
:-Naturalness
:-Precision
:-Conciseness and
:-Consistency.
It is neither of ANY of these things -- not even precision (which no doubt was the supposed intent). It is not a precise title because all throughout the article from top to bottom the word used is pigeon and dove. --Loginnigol 17:37, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you read the closed discussion above, at Talk:Columbidae#Requested move 31 August 2016?  – Corinne (talk) 17:42, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What insanity is this? Bring Pigeon back into the title ASAP

message: the word pigeon is different for pidgin. they are totally different allophones. can they put a disclaimer?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.89.103.161 (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  confusion 

message: What about adding this animation to Columbidae#Behaviour? --Leyo 15:09, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I put it in Columbidae#Flight, since there's no corresponding text in Columbidae#Behaviour... --Nemoschool (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you. --Leyo 22:39, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animation of pigeons flying 

message: I suspect this article's Good Article status needs reviewing. Whole sections are missing (where is breeding?) the standard of citations is pretty poor, there are citation tags in the text, the lead has info not in the article (and cited, a relic from before the article's expansion) and at the beginning of behaviour there is this solitary and incomprehensible statement "Male pigeons are more opportunistic to mate with another female." This needs a lot more work before its close to GA standard. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 19:11, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article status 

message: It looks like the Description section of the page could be clarified by creating separate subsections, including one on anatomy.
The anatomy subsection would specifically include skeletal and muscular structures unique to Columbidae flight ability. We would also like to add a subsection about the flight feathers and agility. It would also link to the Bird anatomy page. Are there and other thoughts on this addition? RameyEA (talk) 02:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description Section 

message: The sentence in the lead "The species most commonly referred to as "pigeon" is the species known by scientists as the rock dove, one subspecies of which, the domestic pigeon, is common in many cities as the feral pigeon."
Should be changed to something like:
"The term "pigeon" used alone often refers to the domestic pigeon, which is common in many cities as the feral pigeon."
Scientists would largely know the species as Columba livia, and Rock Dove and Rock Pigeon are both in common use. And regardless, the current phrasing is redundant. Somatochlora (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Already done NiciVampireHeart 01:11, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2019 

message: Doves and Pigeons have long necks, not short necks. It says in the description, "These are stout-bodied birds with short necks, and short slender bills that in some species feature fleshy ceres." I want the part that says "short necks" to be replaced with "long necks". This is because in comparison to many other songbird species, such as black capped chickadees, american goldfinches, northern cardinals and blue jays, doves and pigeons have a long neck, especially when raised high in alertness. Their neck only appears short when tucked into their body when resting or relaxed. In proportion to their body, their neck is fairly long. 166.48.100.82 (talk) 23:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. This is fairly technical stuff, not an obvious error or typo. --Nemoschool (talk) 00:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2019 

message: The current taxonomy is from the personal website an economics professor and as such cannot be considered a reliable source, further some of the taxonomic names used like "Raphini" appear to be original inventions by the author. The use of Raphinae as a major subfamily is inconsistent with that of used by the wikipedia article, which consists only of two genera (and is now considered a good article). The change was initially made by  on the 10th of December 2016, this has been brought up before, as well as in the 2017 article review and the issue wasn't resolved in either of the discussions. I don't know if any large scale phylogenies of columbidae have been done recently, but such sources should preferentially be used. Pinging users from the last discussion:    and relevant users , ,  and  Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:46, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can see this paper from 2016 (open access) appears to represent the most recent macro-scale phylogeny of Columbidae, and therefore should be used in preference over a self published source. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy 

message: Hey friends, the page mixes up to events in the Gospel of Luke. The doves were not offered at the circumcision of Jesus but at his Presentation on the fortieth day. Luke 2:22-24 Anchisides (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: My notable interest is limited to suggesting that a colleague — more committed to the topic than either I, or the doubtlessly overburdened Anchises — act on the preceding request, and (overwhelmingly more importantly) note (below, within this talk heading) having done so. This will facilitate freeing up for other tasks, the editors with free time on their hands, who might otherwise spend time at least considering a worthwhile improvement on this article (which has value sufficient for being neither neglected nor trashed).<Br>—User:JerzyA (at least for a while, stranded in ip-land) 2601:199:C201:FD70:99BA:370C:B613:98A2 (talk)<Br>  —Preceding undated comment added 10:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not "turtledoves," which are a New World species = Mourning doves. David notMD (talk) 18:32, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mary and Joseph offerring turtledoves 

message: Pigeons can hear infrasound. With the average pigeon being able to hear sounds as low as 0.5 Hz, they can detect distant storms, earthquakes and even volcanoes.https://www.hiddenhearing.co.uk/blog/2018/the-top-10-animals-with-the-best-hearinghttps://www.hearingdoctors.net/blog/these-10-animals-have-the-best-hearing-on-the-planet This also help them to navigate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.203.79 (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hearing 

message: Cher Ami is described here as "she" while other articles about the pigeon indicate that Cher Ami is a cock and therefore a "he".  Suggest either using "he" or neuter reference such as "the pigeon" as in other articles. 69.40.118.248 (talk) 19:31, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2021 

message: section: feeding
Descendants of the domestic rock doves (Columbia Livia) reside in urban environments, disturbing their natural feeding habits. Urban living pigeons depend on human activities and interactions to obtain food, causing them to food on crumbs, spilled food, and out of trash cans. 
 Ksanch40 (talk) 17:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: with edits based on source provided. Thanks, Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:46, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2021 

message: It is precisely the same as this article, but more poorly written. TTTime05 (talk) 13:00, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging article "Doves" 

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that :File:Red-eyed dove (Streptopelia semitorquata).jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 5, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-12-05. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 21:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured picture scheduled for POTD 

message: The statement that the Passenger Pigeon is the only non-island species to go extinct is incorrect.  Should it be the only species of the family not an island species to go extinct? Dzbech (talk) 02:37, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Passenger Pigeon