Talk:Pigeon post

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

Potential Copyright infringement[edit]

"The pigeons carried two kinds of despatch: official and private, both of which are later described in detail." In the section on Paris looks as if it may be lifted from a different source without proper attribution. Later in this section we do not really find official and private separately described in detail. While the section has attribution to a source (a book) it reads as if it was possibly lifted from a book and merely transcribed into wikipedia. If this in fact comes from the book, then the way it is currently used would be in violation of copyright law. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.0.91.3 (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear opening paragraph[edit]

I don't really know anything about the subject so I'm not going to do a write-up, but if anyone sees this the opening paragraph seems to have had a chunk of it cut out, or something... Deptstoremook 20:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The opening paragraph was left into its place by SlipperyHippo in an otherwise sensible edit. I wrote a short new opening paragraph and moved the sentece to its original place. --MPorciusCato 06:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the opening paragraph was changed, this time by Sting au in a series of otherwise very good edits. However, I think that his version is not very good: Pigeon post is the use of homing pigeons to carry messages and is as old as the ancient Persians from whom the art of training the birds probably came. The Greeks conveyed the names of the victors at the Olympic Games to their various cities by this means.

This opening paragraph is not clear. First, the sentence "Pigeon post is the use--" is not very good English. At least, it should have the form: "Pigeon post means the use --" Second, continuing this sentence with "--and is as old as the ancient Persians--", is even worse English. In my view, the original paragraph The use of homing pigeons to carry messages is as old as the ancient Persians from whom the art of training the birds probably came. The Greeks conveyed the names of the victors at the Olympic Games to their various cities by this means." is very good start for the History section. However, the opening paragraph must contain the sentence mentioning that this method is obsolete and historical. --MPorciusCato (talk) 14:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pigeon post is the use....was good English. I'm changing it back. Sting au Buzz Me... 11:26, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.:As you like. I have nothing at stake here. However, I took the liberty of breaking the opening sentene into two parts, making it more readable. In addition, I removed the book URL. That URL does not contain the book, so it is unappropriate. --MPorciusCato (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2008 (UTC):.[reply]

Outdated?[edit]

The great mario of Wikipedia is up-to-date information. However, in this article: In view of the development of wireless telegraphy the modern tendency is to consider fortress warfare as the only sphere in which homing pigeons can be expected to render really valuable services. Consequently, British Admiralty has discontinued its pigeon service, which had attained a remarkably high standard of efficiency, and other powers will no doubt follow the example. Nevertheless, large numbers of birds are, and will presumably continue to be, kept at the great inland fortresses of France, Germany and Russia. A bit outdated, perhaps? Encyclopedia Britannica of 1911 is a great source, but should be used with moderation. --MPorciusCato 22:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having found time, I made some careful changes to show that the text is no longer valid. --MPorciusCato 14:03, 9 January 2007 (

Partial Carrier pigeon merge[edit]

The post-related material at Carrier pigeon is proposed to merge into this article (if any of it needs to be retained), with the remainder merging to Homing pigeon, to which the emptied article title would redirect, and to War pigeon. This merge was first proposed (at Talk:Carrier pigeon) in September 2009 and was unopposed, but did not get performed.

Please centralize discussion, at Talk:Homing pigeon#Proposed merge 2.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  13:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pigeon post. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

English[edit]

How did the pigeons pass their days? 120.89.104.232 (talk) 03:11, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pigeon_post&oldid=1194942915"