Jump to content

User talk:OnorioCatenacci

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia bookmarks

[edit]

Welcome

[edit]
Hello, OnorioCatenacci! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Sting au Buzz Me... 12:10, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

Aviculture

[edit]

Hi Onorio: You might check with Snowmanradio about the task force—he's been trying to drum up interest in one for a while... MeegsC | Talk 20:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Onorio, yes I'm interested in an aviculture/pigeons taskforce. Probably better as a sub-project under WikiProject Birds? We could set up our own WikiProject of we decide to. This is Wikipedia after all. Or what do you suggest?--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Great. There is so much to do with the pigeon articles still. I have hardly scratched the surface on some of the breed articles. Fancy pigeon needs work badly and there isn't even a Utility pigeon article yet! Pictures are needed badly. The Birmingham Roller article doesn't have a picture yet, and that is a pretty common breed. The Modena (pigeon) doesn't have an article here yet and it's one of the most popular of the exhibition breeds. I'm also wanting to get a Pigeon shows (or similar?) article up and running. I've been busy doing stuff for the pigeon articles and to draw attention to pigeons in general. I made the pigeon fancier userbox (on my userpage) and created the stub template for domesticated pigeon breeds. Prior to that articles used a dove template. Also created a couple of more defining categories that the articles now reside in. A Wikiproject specific for pigeons and a pigeon breeds taskforce will be very helpful for us here.--Sting au Buzz Me... 23:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Your welcome to use the userbox. The more who do the better:-) I also made one for beekeepers and one for proud mothers, but that was for someone else who was having trouble making it. As for the projects? I think Aviculture first as that will gather in all who keep and breed birds rather than just those who work on wild bird articles. The poultry people have been getting busy on articles too I believe, but I haven't checked for a while. It pays to use each others ideas to best advantage around this place. I'm still in the learning process myself in Wikipedia. Anyhow, gotta go offline for a while now. Got a boy who wants to go catch a fish! And it's school hols and I have the day off so time to go.--Sting au Buzz Me... 00:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Me again :-) I've removed aviculture cat and language additions to some articles you've done. Aviculture doesn't really fit for domesticated pigeons. Use Category:Domestic pigeons instead. Aviculture is more for wildtype species. Foriegn doves and wildtype pigeons, parrots, finches, etc. The language article added in a side panel must correspond to the subject. i.e. see Rock Pigeon.--Sting au Buzz Me... 12:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I realise pigeons are birds kept in cages. But they are not really "cage birds" in the sense that cafe bird enthusiasts use the term. Pigeons (at least the ones we keep) are in general highly cultivated domesticated varieties. Cage birds and aviculture in general focuses mainly on wildtype species but kept in a "caged" environment. They (the enthusiasts) are noted for preserving the wild type species. Pigeon fanciers on the other hand are more into developing new varieties not found out in the wild. In fact some of our breeds wouldn't survive out on their own. Hope you don't mind my changes but I really do feel that the category change was necessary? Go to any avicultural show and you find many parrot breeders but very few pigeon fanciers (unless they are also a budgerigar breeder). Likewise at pigeon shows you don't see the parrot breeders.--Sting au Buzz Me... 12:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Mate, I've dropped my name from the Aviculture project proposal. I'm more into pigeons (as you know) and the broader scope that aviculture would cover doesn't suit me at present. The pigeon articles. Well at least the domesticated breed articles don't have a very big following just yet. I've been meaning to do more but I'm awaiting the winter shows here so I can get some decent digital pics. Once I get those I will no doubt start editing the articles again with renewed vigour.--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bird identification

[edit]

Hi there. I was told (at WikiProject Birds) that you might be able to help identify the birds in this picture. Ignore the name and description - that's just me calling them doves because they are in what was traditionally called a "dove house". Is there enough detail in the pictures for you to be able to tell what species they are? I have some pictures that are slightly closer and from different angles, if that would help. Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 00:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it is dovecote, not dove house! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 00:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They (the pigeons in the picture) look like white homing pigeons. There's an article on white Release Doves might interest you?--Sting au Buzz Me... 12:33, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re Issues With Pigeon Articles

[edit]

G'day Onorio. I replied on my talk page in between your comments.--Sting au Buzz Me... 11:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning (well it is here) just thought of something else. With adding breed standards to articles we need to be careful of copyrights. As the breed articles develop you will find the need to reference just about everything. In fact if you ever decide to try and bring an article up to GA or Featured status you will discover that every sentence (just about) needs to be reliably sourced. That is not an easy task as I found out when a group of us editors were working on the Rock Pigeon article. So if you were trying to add a written standard for each breed that's when copyright issues could come up? A link to a standard on the web is ok, but the thing is with most of the breed articles is to just keep/make them encyclopedic. Finding references is our most important task at present because some of the articles would have a hard time surviving an AfD at present. Pictures help make the article more presentable too. Do you happen to have a digital camera and access to the pigeon shows over there?--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G'day mate, the articles you propose all sound great. I'm definitely in favor of an article on Wendell M. Levi. Pensom and Hollander may be a little difficult? But still in favor of them also. Biographical articles are hard to do as they get picked on by deletionists. You'd really need to do your homework and add in references pretty much with the first draft or someone will tag it with a CSD in new page patrol. An article on The Pigeon by Levi is a great idea too. It is a book that a lot of pigeon fanciers would be familiar with. Where they all fit? Don't worry there are plenty of categories that they will come under. Some editors go around adding suitable categories to articles. So even if an article has an uncategorized tag to begin with it soon gets improved by other editors.--Sting au Buzz Me... 12:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks :-) That was a picture of my very own homemade Sputnik trap. I was thinking the pigeon keeping article could do with a "Feeding" section? What do you think?--Sting au Buzz Me... 03:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

G'day Mate, I guess what I'm trying to say by wanting them footnoted is that "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article" as per that style guideline. Quite frankly it looks bad in an article when they are done like that. In my opinion I think it's better to select/adapt info from the website and link (footnote) to it in the reference section. Otherwise just add the links to the external link section. Actually that would probably be best for the German club main page link to just be added to external links. No need to have two active links in that particular paragraph. It does look terrible per WP:MOS it suggest [1] looks better. I'd be inclined to use (in German) however. So no ones doubting the veracity or anything like that mate :-) Just trying to clean things up is all. So I'm suggesting now we just add the first link (VDT-online main page) to the external links section (delink the text in article) and footnote the second link to a reference section or otherwise use (in German) at the end of the sentence rather than linking the text. In my opinion that would look a whole lot better and fits the Wikipedia guidelines better. --Sting au Buzz Me... 22:12, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh just thought of something else to comment on. I was aware of the different grouping scheme in Germany. i.e. Formentauben, Warzentauben, Huhntauben, Kropftauben, Farbentauben, Trommeltauben, Movchentauben, Strukturetauben, Tummlertauben and Spielflugtauben as I was able to view a German standards book several years ago. I couldn't understand German but did translate some bits via Babelfish of interest to me at the time. The Germans are great perfectionists and I do in fact like their grouping scheme. There is a German Wikipedia so might be a good idea to check out if they have corresponding articles we can get ideas from.--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah looks great now :-)--Sting au Buzz Me... 03:54, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pigeon lofts

[edit]

G'day Onorio, I disagree with some of your changes mate. The word lofts is "generally" used not "sometimes" as you have changed it to. The term "loft" has been used pretty much since Moore (1735) and is what the vast majority of pigeon fanciers use to describe their pigeon housing. This is a public information encyclopedia and we need to get across to people who know nothing about pigeons, just what terms are used by us. I've had pigeons most of my life and in that time have picked up quite a bit of knowledge on the subject and many a reference book resides in my library collection. I'd prefer it if the wording in that section was reverted back to "lofts" please. Also the two Levi book links are showing up as 13 and 14 when they should be "named" so they only come up in the ref list once. I could do it for you but probably better to let you as you learn better that way. Cheers,--Sting au Buzz Me... 22:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Mate. The page numbers will still be viewable in the citation template in edit mode by anyone wishing to verify (as they are now. Take a look). I personally don't bother that much with page numbers as I feel it is enough to identify the specific published work used? Anyone familiar with The Pigeon will automatically know it has a reference for just about anything to do with domestic pigeons. The other way I suppose is to use a "Notes" section in tandem with a "Reference" section. I'll see if I can find an example. Here take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources#Shortened notes as that shows the method. Again personally I don't use a notes section in combination with the ref' section. Although it does look very nice when set up correctly. Different articles use different methods of inline citation styles. I must admit I'm no fan of Harvard referencing. I much prefer the use of footnotes over embedded links also. I guess this is an area that can cause disagreement amongst editors because of preferences for particular styles? If you're desperately wanting to go with page numbers then I'd use the Notes/References in tandem method. I don't think it's necessary as Pigeon keeping is not really a good candidate for GA in my opinion (Domestic pigeon or Feral pigeon maybe?). Remember it is only about one in 584 makes it to GA and about one in 1,160 to Featured status. So it is an awful lot of work getting them up to standard. My main concern is just that the articles are encyclopedic in as much as providing information to the person coming along who knows very little about the subject. I'm not wanting to overload a reader with too much information as I feel summaries suffice and hopefully readers are then directed to particular reference texts if they feel that they would like to learn more?--Sting au Buzz Me... 05:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjet Birds May 2008 Newsletter

[edit]

The May 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

[edit]

You can submit Pigeon keeping for a GA review if you like. It wont pass as is though, but it will be a good way to find out what needs doing to fix it up. You can mark articles a "B" yourself if you believe they meet the criteria. Anything higher needs to go through a review process.--Sting au Buzz Me... 12:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For GA you need to put it up at Wikipedia:Good article nominations. Probably under "Natural sciences - Biology and medicine" category. The editors on Wikiproject Bird (which includes me and you) usually only rate as high as a "B" without going through the review process. The GA nomination process gives a better peer review as articles of that standard require. Might be a bit of a wait before someone gets to look at it though? There is a bit of a backlog at GA.--Sting au Buzz Me... 21:36, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

G'day Onorio, Breed is a better choice of word in that paragraph. The link you had was [[Breeders|keep]] which directed readers (via redirect) to Breeder (disambiguation) which then required the reader to choose another link. When you set up wikilinks could you please see that they lead directly to a page that suits. Sometimes helps if you open another window and check where the link arrives at.--Sting au Buzz Me... 21:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Domestic Pigeons proposal

[edit]

I have proposed a WikiProject on domestic pigeons to help overcome many of the problems and inconsistancies relating to Wikipedia's coverage of domestic pigeon related topics. Please follow this link and show your support! Abbott75 ღ 09:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re domesticated pigeon task force

[edit]

Great work with the task force. I'm pretty busy at present with offline life, but I'll lend a hand as I'm able. Cheers, Sting au Buzz Me... 23:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries :-) I'm just reading some of the comments on task force talk page and several articles being mentioned already exist. Dickin medal, Pigeon post etc. Check in Category:Domestic pigeons or add suitable articles to that category.--Sting au Buzz Me... 23:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Cher ami does look ok. Could do with a picture though? Might need to check it for dead links etc? I gotta go do a few things offline, so I'll catch up with you later.--Sting au Buzz Me... 23:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Onorio. The taskforce userbox would be better in "Template" space (but don't worry if you're happy where it is). Also the image page at Wikimedia is lacking "source" and "author" information. I've also created the shortcut to the taskforce as WP:PIGEONS.--Sting au Buzz Me... 05:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Onorio, please don't add every pigeon article to the task force category. It creates category clutter and is quite frankly WP:OCAT. There are existing categorys that task force members (or any editor) can visit to search for articles to work on. Leave the task force category as a member cat which you can link from the userbox.--Sting au Buzz Me... 23:25, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
They are in Category:Domestic pigeons now. Right where they should be. Adding them to the task force category is overcat. Or didn't I explain that?--Sting Buzz Me... 01:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds June 2008 Newsletter

[edit]

The June 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 13:15, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Pigeons gain in popularity

[edit]

Yes it was great finding that Ann Arbor News article. Nice to be able to put a face with the name :-) I search Google News on a regular basis looking for snipets of pigeon info to factor into the articles. That one was a good find. On another topic, I've contacted another editor in regard to a pigeonbreeds infobox. Another editor put me onto a guy who made one for use on the Chicken articles. I'll get back to you when I hear back from him.--Sting Buzz Me... 10:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G'day Onorio, Here's a link to the Infobox for Pigeon breeds. Template:Infobox Pigeonbreed that user Stepshep created for us. If we need to adjust anything or any questions let me know please. I put a test infobox on the English Fantail article. I still need to expand that article with refs etc.--Sting Buzz Me... 12:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a reference for that grouping system in the US?--Sting Buzz Me... 13:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pfautaube would be fine on a German wiki. But here? If the infoboxes are going wind up cluttered it is looking like a bad idea to have them.--Sting Buzz Me... 13:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re infobox

[edit]

No I don't like the three groupings on the infobox Onorio. It just looks way too cluttered that way. But you do have a point with the different systems operating in different countries. I think it's a shame that there is not just one world-wide grouping syste. That is why I was hoping to just use the "arbitrary" grouping system (perhaps tweak it a bit which you did already) we have on the Fancy pigeon article. At least use it for now for simplicity sake. If any particular breed article comes into major problems by using that we can then make individual changes to suit? A US standards book? Wow that must be an old one! Hey you're in the NPA aren't you? Why don't you get together with say Steve StClair and get a new standards book up and printed? We did it here in Australia and it's in loose leaf (ring binder) format so that any additions or changes can just be printed up and added in. The US really does need to adopt a better grouping system than just Fancy, Homing and Utility. That went out with the Ark. Also I probably didn't explain my opposition to the German naming enough to you? It's not that I'm against other countries having their names for breeds in their language. My point was that this wiki we are on now is "English" Wikipedia. There is a seperate German Wikipedia, French Wikipedia etc. We should in fact check to see if they have corresponding articles to what we have here. The german name on the jpeg is irrelevant. If an editor ever happens to not know what a "Pfautaube" is, then I'm sure they can ask on the article talk page. I'm pretty sure they'd be smart enough to equate Pfautaube with Fantail in any case. Anyhow, I'm rambling on and have lots to do today. Not really much time to be online, but I'll see what needs doing on my watch list.--Sting Buzz Me... 02:22, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep taskforce is on my watch list. No comment to make as yet. Yes, I also have Pigeon racing on watch. I used to race pigeons many years ago. I might take it up again one day?--Sting Buzz Me... 12:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re catching up

[edit]

No worries mate. There's more to life than just the Internet. I get busy with other things myself at times. The old book reprint sounds very interesting. I like old books and keep an eye out for bargains on ebay. I went to the recent Queensland State pigeon show and picked up some prizes. The National is on here next month and I'm looking forward to that. I'm hoping to gets some more pictures of breeds I missed at the State show with my digital camera. Cheers, Sting Buzz Me... 23:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The December 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. --Addbot (talk) 16:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re US Breed Groups

[edit]

Your dads book will come in handy. Even if used for references within the breed articles. I have seen references used for information in infoboxes. It does look more professional, but I wouldn't be too concerned if the same ref is also used elsewhere in the main article body. No I'm not aware of a guideline about it? Might be in WP:CITE perhaps? I'm a bit busy so will look later. Just add refs as you deem them necessary. If an editor thinks it should be different they can always revert or change the edit.--Sting Buzz Me... 22:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re Pigeon Task Force Talk Page

[edit]

G'day Mate, Yeah I saw the bot edit. Actually I think it was the bot owner? There was a mistake in the destination page, and it was fixed (I think? I didn't check). No need to protect archived talk pages. It's just the pigeon task force after all ;-) If anyone ever feels the need to add to an archived discussion (which I have seen done before) it wont be a drama anyhow. No need to protect pages all that much because reverting is so easy, and the history preserves everything relevant, so nothing gets lost.--Sting Buzz Me... 09:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds August newsletter

[edit]

The August 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 01:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds October newsletter

[edit]

The October 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds November newsletter

[edit]

The December 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

WikiProject Birds February newsletter

[edit]

The February 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 22:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds March newsletter

[edit]

The March 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds April newsletter

[edit]

The April 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 15:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Birds May newsletter

[edit]

The May 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

WikiProject Birds June newsletter

[edit]

The June 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

WikiProject Birds August newsletter

[edit]

The August 2009 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Newsletter delivery by –xeno talk 02:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Science lovers wanted!

[edit]
Science lovers wanted!
Hi! I'm serving as the wikipedian-in-residence at the Smithsonian Institution Archives until June! One of my goals as resident, is to work with Wikipedians and staff to improve content on Wikipedia about people who have collections held in the Archives - most of these are scientists who held roles within the Smithsonian and/or federal government. I thought you might like to participate since you are interested in the sciences! Sign up to participate here and dive into articles needing expansion and creation on our to-do list. Feel free to make a request for images or materials at the request page, and of course, if you share your successes at the outcomes page you will receive the SIA barnstar! Thanks for your interest, and I look forward to your participation! Sarah (talk) 02:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Say hello to... A PIGEON!

[edit]

Hello! I notice you are a fellow pigeon fancier! Perhaps you would like to see this picture of a pigeon!

HELLO

Have a lovely day today.. Lamb Ham Jam Man (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:OnorioCatenacci&oldid=1181996288"