Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
Chickilim

Category Proposal: Dovecotes

60 posts in this topic

Dear Waymarkers,

 

We are really sorry to discover during the "peer reviewing" of the new category we propose "Dovecotes (Pigeonniers, Colombiers, Fuies)" that some negative votes are based on the lack of discussion on the forum. We did not think that this step was absolutely required before submitting a new category.

We hope that members who voted against the creation of this new category revise their judgment in bringing their arguments here.

It is true that one of the officers has not yet visited or published waymark to this day, but he plans to do it quickly because it has placed several geocaches near a dovecote.

 

Thank you for your understanding,

 

Chickilim

0

Share this post


Link to post

My negative vote (along with others) was not based solely on the category not being brought up in forums but rather because the category description needs work. If it had been brought up in the forums prior to being put up for peer review it could have been cleaned up.

0

Share this post


Link to post

A forum discussion is NOT required before a category is put to vote. However, it really helps to have a discussion on the forums BEFORE peer review so that you can address any questions/issues that others may have.

 

An officer with zero waymarks posted and zero waymarks visited has (presumably) no experience in Waymarking and is therefore not in the best position for reviewing waymarks. Experience is key.

 

Here are my questions/comments:

 

1. You must use WGS84 datum. I don't even know what this means, but does it matter? Maybe it does, but I don't know what it is and I've been getting accurate coords on my gps for over 5 years now. Other categories don't have this requirement, so why does your category (Just asking).

 

2. Is it still a dovecote or has it been converted into housing, commercial or other ? (optional)

(if you cannot answer with certainty, leave blank.)

If the structure is no longer a dovecote, why waymark it in this category?

 

3. Finally, thank you to evaluate from 1 to 5 the difficulty of the access to the dovecote (required). This is an unusual requirement. However, after taking a look at the photos I can understand why you want this information included in the waymark. Did you take those photos yourselves, or get them from the Internet? If they are not yours, then you need to give credit to the source. Great photos!

 

4. It is not required to take a picture of yourself in front of the dovecote or to take a picture of your GPS, feel free about it...

Any photo copied/pasted on the Internet or in a book will result in the cancellation of the log. I don't see any reason to include this in the category write-up. If these things are NOT required, why include them? The note about stealing someone else's images from the internet is a little redundant since you already stated that visitors need to include a photo they took themselves.

 

I like the idea of Waymarking the Dovecotes. They are very interesting and presumably global. I believe we have one in my area, but it is NOT being used any more, and thus my question about why waymark it?

 

I hope you have success with the category. Good luck to you!

0

Share this post


Link to post

I personally feel ALL category proposals should be required to go through this forum FIRST before submitting it to Peer Review. With so many categories already created within Waymarking.com, the odds of creating/submitting a potentially new category that has redundancy issues and other conflicts with already-existing categories are greatly increased. I have discovered this myself a few times when trying to think of a new category writeup in the past and realizing a category already exists to waymark a location into. Bringing one's category idea to this forum FIRST would eliminate a lot of negative feedback from other waymarkers in the Peer Review (such as the variables being too poorly written, inexperienced officers, etc.).

 

This forum is the best place for 'seasoned' waymarkers to look at one's category proposal (like Dovecotes) and to make suggestions to improve it BEFORE the category leader and officers submit it for Peer Review. It's silly to go from Point 'A' to point 'C' and skipping point 'B' ('B' being this forum). I also agree that any officer of a category proposal should have some experience in Waymarking and not be someone acting as a 'number' to meet the category's group requirements. Finally, just because someone has a lot of Geocaching experience doesn't make him or her a good waymarker. They are two different activities that share only one main facet: a GPS location.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Are the Dovecotes category officers not interested in a discussion? We are here to help!

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

2. Is it still a dovecote or has it been converted into housing, commercial or other ? (optional)

(if you cannot answer with certainty, leave blank.)

If the structure is no longer a dovecote, why waymark it in this category?

 

I like the idea of Waymarking the Dovecotes. They are very interesting and presumably global. I believe we have one in my area, but it is NOT being used any more, and thus my question about why waymark it?

 

I hope you have success with the category. Good luck to you!

 

Max and 99 quoted because it raises some good points! :)

 

I have a Dovecote in the National Trust category.

It's 'No longer used' for it's original purpose, but the occasional dove does find it's way inside!

 

I doubt any remaining dovecotes (especially in the UK) are used for their original purpose these days.

I can understand some may have been converted for another use, does this mean they are not allowed in the Dovecote category? Even if there is evidence of use as a dovecote?

 

And. Can the waymarks be posted, if they are in another category?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you all for taking the time to comment your "Deny votes" on our proposal for this category. Sorry for not having responded quickly for reasons of personal schedule.

Here are the answers we like to give to the main objections.

 

- ON THE PRESENCE OF AN OFFICER OF THE CLASS NOT YET "WAYMARKER"

We recruited another officer (Ava Dahmer) with greater experience Waymarking (67 waymarks and 532 visits) than marmotterando.

 

- ON TOO MANY VARIABLES: It seems that some have not noticed that only 3 were required. We thought that other variables could potentially be filled by local visitors in their logs. Taking into account the various comments, here is our list of new variables:

 

1 - A photograph of the dovecote taken by you is required. The photograph required does not need to show the entire building, the goal must be recognizable dovecote in the picture. Additional pictures of the dovecote or some details are optional goal will be welcome.

2 - All possible information regarding the location, architecture and history of the dovecote are welcome in the description.

3 - How many putlogs (pigeonholes) in it? (OPTIONAL)

4 - Century of construction? (OPTIONAL)

5 - If the building cannot be approached directly by car, a parking area may be indicated as well as the walking time in minutes required to reach the dovecote (OPTIONAL).

 

- ON THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS CATEGORY: We are surprised that some may have judged "poor" our description in comparison to some categories. By placing links to pages on Wikipedia we wanted to allow everyone to benefit from detailed information on the history of the pigeon in the world. It would have been tedious to describe at length in our description, or worse copy/paste these excellent contributions while they are very complete in it. In addition, you will notice that we have taken the trouble to illustrate our description with PERSONAL pictures to the attention of those who do not have the chance to know what is a dovecote.

 

- ON THE FACT OF A DOVECOTE COULD BE TODAY IN ACTIVITY: The interest of the category that we offer is to highlight the varied architecture of these old buildings. Even if they were transformed into something else, often they retain their architectural features and it is indeed the object of that category.

 

- ON THE PREVALENCE OF THIS TYPE OF BUILDING: As stated in the Wikipedia page, there are thousands of dovecotes throughout Western Europe, Central Europe, Middle East and even in the United States. We even think it exists in Asia despite the lack of concrete information about it.

 

- ON THE FRENCH TRANSLATION: As French waymarkers, we thought it would be a plus to add a French translation in our description. Who can do more, can do less ;-) ! We are well aware that the Waymarking is Anglo-Saxon, but why English-speakers waymarkers could be hostile to some additive translation ?..

 

Finally, we add that we are big fans of dovecotes and we want to share our passion for the great variety of these buildings to the greatest number. This is what led us to propose this new category. We believe it has its place in the Waymarking and we hope that we will bring here some answers that suit.

Anyway, we remain attentive to all your remarks.

Best regards,

Chickilim

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you all for taking the time to comment your "Deny votes" on our proposal for this category. Sorry for not having responded quickly for reasons of personal schedule.

Here are the answers we like to give to the main objections.

 

- ON THE PRESENCE OF AN OFFICER OF THE CLASS NOT YET "WAYMARKER"

We recruited another officer (Ava Dahmer) with greater experience Waymarking (67 waymarks and 532 visits) than marmotterando.

 

- ON TOO MANY VARIABLES: It seems that some have not noticed that only 3 were required. We thought that other variables could potentially be filled by local visitors in their logs. Taking into account the various comments, here is our list of new variables:

 

1 - A photograph of the dovecote taken by you is required. The photograph required does not need to show the entire building, the goal must be recognizable dovecote in the picture. Additional pictures of the dovecote or some details are optional goal will be welcome.

2 - All possible information regarding the location, architecture and history of the dovecote are welcome in the description.

3 - How many putlogs (pigeonholes) in it? (OPTIONAL)

4 - Century of construction? (OPTIONAL)

5 - If the building cannot be approached directly by car, a parking area may be indicated as well as the walking time in minutes required to reach the dovecote (OPTIONAL).

 

- ON THE DESCRIPTION OF THIS CATEGORY: We are surprised that some may have judged "poor" our description in comparison to some categories. By placing links to pages on Wikipedia we wanted to allow everyone to benefit from detailed information on the history of the pigeon in the world. It would have been tedious to describe at length in our description, or worse copy/paste these excellent contributions while they are very complete in it. In addition, you will notice that we have taken the trouble to illustrate our description with PERSONAL pictures to the attention of those who do not have the chance to know what is a dovecote.

 

- ON THE FACT OF A DOVECOTE COULD BE TODAY IN ACTIVITY: The interest of the category that we offer is to highlight the varied architecture of these old buildings. Even if they were transformed into something else, often they retain their architectural features and it is indeed the object of that category.

 

- ON THE PREVALENCE OF THIS TYPE OF BUILDING: As stated in the Wikipedia page, there are thousands of dovecotes throughout Western Europe, Central Europe, Middle East and even in the United States. We even think it exists in Asia despite the lack of concrete information about it.

 

- ON THE FRENCH TRANSLATION: As French waymarkers, we thought it would be a plus to add a French translation in our description. Who can do more, can do less ;-) ! We are well aware that the Waymarking is Anglo-Saxon, but why English-speakers waymarkers could be hostile to some additive translation ?..

 

Finally, we add that we are big fans of dovecotes and we want to share our passion for the great variety of these buildings to the greatest number. This is what led us to propose this new category. We believe it has its place in the Waymarking and we hope that we will bring here some answers that suit.

Anyway, we remain attentive to all your remarks.

Best regards,

Chickilim

 

Chiklim -- I am so glad you have come back to the forum! :D

 

I was hoping that some of the negative votes you recieved would not frighten you away from working with the smarter waymarkers than me that write here. Their advice will help you to make this waymark EXCEPTIONAL and SUCCESSFUL!!

 

I have read the forum posts, and I have learned a lot from them and other waymarkers. The messages can be blunt sometimes, but I do not take it personally.

 

I think everyone here has a sincere desire to see your category succeed and help make it the best it can be -- there is a lot of wisdom here, and I hope you will take advantage of it. B)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you Benchmark Blasterz for your post that warms my heart and encourages us to continue to work on this category proposal !

0

Share this post


Link to post

I hope you understood that my negative vote was only about protocol of a category proposal and the concern of the inexperience of officers. Too many categories have become 'orphans' when Waymarkers drift away into other pursuits, then other Premium Waymarker(s) volunteer to keep the category alive. There has also been an issue of 'non-existent' members being created to meet the 3 premium member officer requirement (not saying that is the case here!).

 

I think this is a great category idea, even though is is limited to mainly Europe (not to say these places will not be found in other areas of the world). The photos of examples are great! While only three variables were required, there are still many variables - why is all this info needed. Only reason I ask is this may have been what was driving the question by voting members. It sometimes gets hard to remember odd info needed by a category when out Waymarking - especially if one cannot easily return to get the info.

 

Many of us outside of the central Europe area would only be able to Waymark these while on a vacation. (Say, anyone live near Nancy? I need some photos from the cemetery - genealogy!) That may be another factor driving some of the comments.

 

Please do not take offense at the 'nay' votes. We are only trying to keep Waymarking viable and help improve the categories. Waymarking, like any other hobby, is evolving through experience and lessons learned. Welcome and Bonjour - we are grateful for your participation!

 

Take care,

Outspoken1

0

Share this post


Link to post

Almost anything has been said now. The idea is great, but the way it appeared in peer review let some alarm bells ring. We had some bad experiences in the past that started exactly like this. A not very experienced waymarker recruites some geocaching buddies who are not interested but willing to help a friend (typical is that they are all from the same area and enrollment is off). The category goes to peer review without having been discussed before, and finally after a while this person loses interest and there's another abandoned category we have to deal with. This is probably not the case with you, but the pattern matches just too good.

 

Back to the proposal: The idea has its merits. The posting instructions are a bit confusing and not easy to read. All those variables are too much. If we had the possibility to filter variables in searches, then they could make sense, but this is not the case. I would prefer when you change the posting instructions to narrative instead of a numbered list and just ask the submitter to add as many information as possible to the long description of a waymark; you can still require some of the information, it is the reviewing officer who has to ensure that a submission fits the requirements.

 

I have no problem with bilingual category descriptions, I think it's fine. Only when the text is unclear and overcharged in one language, the this effect appears even worse when looking at it in several languages.

 

Some details:

WGS84. Yes, obviously; and this requirements appears on some other categories, I know. But I guess most waymarkers do not even know that there are other formats and what the difference is. So I would skip this.

 

Also difficulty of access and the part about copyrighted pictures are either superfluous or self-evident.

 

On the other hand I would require an additional picture of the building/structure as a whole. Just the detail picture of some holes in a wall are probably not enough to document the location.

 

And the most important thing: According to some comments it was not clear if abandoned or converted dovecoats are accepted. I thought they were but then I became unsure. Please clarify this point!

Edited by fi67
0

Share this post


Link to post

One other question we have now is whether this category is limited to the ancient dovecotes like are found only in Europe -- the ones in your super-cool pictures.

 

We have several homing pigeon racing clubs in North Texas. Presumably those birds are housed in a modern-day dovecote or equivalent. Would those be waymarkable in your category, even though the structures are new and may be merely utilitarian?

 

Allowing modern dovecotes will broaden the category and make if more global, but are these what you are looking for? Maybe these would show the development and adaptation of the ancient dovecote to modern times if allowed - which depending in how you look at your category might be valuable for it. Historic preservation + promotion.

 

You see that we are already thinking more about dovecotes and seeing if we may be able to support this new category with a WM! :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Hey Chikilim,

 

Thanks for staying with us. I too, was one of the nay votes. Definitely not because I didn't like the category. As has been stated already, the process of going through the forums can be a valuable endeavor that has the potential to improve your category. OK, I'm not including myself in this statement, but there are some very seasoned veteran waymarkers here who can provide worthwhile advice. From what I've seen, they are happy to help.

 

I look at it this way. Even at work when I have to write something, I always run it past colleagues in the office - some because I know they are good at editing and some because they know the subject matter. I've found it beneficial to run it past other eyes, who may see something that I didn't or can suggest a better way to say the same thing - making it more concise or more descriptive, or more clear and understandable. I've even run into this when submitting waymarks. Yes, I have had a number of submittals denied. Admittedly, a few didn't fit the category for one reason or another. But more frequently, it is because of something that I overlooked, or didn't quite describe it properly. I'm always thankful for constructive criticism and, quite frankly, my submittal turns out much better after I've incorporated their suggestions.

 

I noticed that you have made changes with your Officers. As I see it, the problem with inexperienced Officers is that it automatically throws up a red flag, in that one questions the persons commitment to the Waymarking community. It is just easier to see that someone who has been Waymarking, both visiting and submitting waymarks, for a while, is more likely to stick with it when it comes to reviewing submissions.

 

Again, I think your category looks like an interesting one, even though I can't say I've ever seen one. Keep working at it, take the advise that makes sense to you and I'm sure you'll agree that your category will be better for the effort.

 

Good luck!

Chasing Blue Sky

0

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting category for which all have been said.

Awaiting for a new peer review...

Gérard

0

Share this post


Link to post

Can the edited new category submission be posted here first? Then we will look over it again and make sure there are no things in there that need clarifying that have been missed. THEN resubmit in peer review, and I bet a lot of No votes turn Yes, Yes?? :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Forum discussion is not a requirement, but it is extremely helpful. It helps us understand the category better, and in that sense may help you gain support. The forum is an opportunity to present the category and explain it to those of us who may not be as familiar with the topic. I know that I fall into that category.

 

I've never seen one in the U.S. or in Asia. There is a famous park in the town where I live in Korea that has some large bird houses, but I think they are for pigeons so wouldn't qualify for this category.

 

If you received negative comments about making your category bilingual, I am truly sorry to hear that! While I'm a strong advocate of keeping English as our common language for Waymarking, I encourage bilingual or multilingual waymarks and I feel the same way about categories! I would like to do this with more of the categories that I have written.

 

These past three weeks of playing tourist in SE Asia has made me even more aware of how important English has become as a lingua franca. We met to ladies - one from Finland, one from Sweden. They met in Iceland and are traveling together - with English as their common language. We stayed with a Korean in Thailand who had a Thai assistant. Again, English was their common language. I saw some four-way translation -- Korean to English to Thai to Lahu (a tribe in northern Thailand). This gave me a new perspective as a TESOL teacher.

 

Pardon the digression. But, please do continue to work on this category. I think it sounds interesting. Let a native English speaker polish the English if necessary.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think you should keep the category write-up bilingual.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I was also one of the nay voters.

The idea is not too bad. I have wondered several times that there is no category for dovecotes. So your idea isn't so wrong.

 

Some questions and annotations:

What is about modern dovecotes? I know some modern ones made of wood. Can they be waymarked in your category?

I personally dislike multilingual category descriptions. English is our lingua franka at Waymarking. So the category descriptions for global categories should be written in English only. Exceptions would be national categories like trigpoints or historical places. Bilingual Waymarks are OK for me. But not the descriptions of the categories.

 

Other things have already been said here. Please go ahead with your idea and we will have another interesting category here at Waymarking.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm talking about modern ones like this one:

 

f8028fbc-d552-4b1d-a5e2-ce786de99826.JPG

 

Would this kind of wooden dovecote also be accepted in your category??

I think they should!

0

Share this post


Link to post

It's a good point. Is the purpose of this category to waymark only historic dovecotes or also the modern ones?

 

A few examples of modern ones (not so interesting in my opinion):

columbofilia.jpg

Pombal-AnaRisca.jpg

8fd60c477fe9506803321a91873be093.jpg

6a4511f4c635cb39411bfe53b2b7e425.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post

- CONCERNING THE MODERN DOVECOTES : First, we think that pigeon transporter (such as : http://www.commercialmotor.com/big-lorry-blog/racing-and-homing-pigeons-retu#.UR4xUBKarTo) should be exclude of this category. We can precise in our description that dovecotes must be statics ones.

 

We need for your help about modern dovecote structure. It is obvious that the modern dovecote presented by Tante.Hossi could be accepted. But what do you think about those pigeons lofts presented by TMOB or here http://trainingracingpigeons.net/racing-pigeon-lofts-considering-the-top-spot-along-with-the-right-care/ and here http://www.westerncapepigeonracing.co.za/leukes_brothers.htm ?

We don’t think they have a lot of interest because they are more cages than dovecotes. Do you think we can exclude them ? and if yes how ?

 

And what about those little gardens’ dovecotes (http://www.dovecotes.org/rivington-dovecotes.html) ? Some of them could be pretty but we think that they are too small for our category. We may exclude them by specifying that the dovecote should not be transportable by one person. What do you think ?

 

- Hey SILVERQUILL ! Dovecotes are surely for doves but mainly for pigeons ! So please let us know about the korean dovecotes !..

 

- Dear TANTE.HOSSI, is that your vote will stay a "Nay" if we keep the French translation as some others encourage us to do so ? Please keep in mind that the description will be shorter 4 or 5 variables instead of 10…

 

- We are waiting for your suggestions and be sure, BENCHMARK BLASTERZ, that we will post here our new category submission before sending it to peer review !

 

Pending our next post, please take a look at some dovecotes from all around the world with the following links !

 

India :

http://www.lib.mq.edu.au/digital/lema/gallery/seringapatam/dovecote.html

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-56974723/stock-photo-ancient-hindu-dovecote-on-the-banks-of-the-sacred-banganga-tank-in-the-malabar-district-of-mumbai.html

 

Bangladesh

http://bangladeshunlocked.blogspot.fr/2012/04/shiva-temple-or-dove-cote-betka-up.html

 

Qatar, Arabia :

http://www.123rf.com/photo_8789562_a-traditional-arabian-pigeon-house-or-dovecote-at-the-katara-traditional-village-in-west-bay-doha-qa.html

 

Mexico :

http://www.redbubble.com/people/vadim19/works/5756975-the-dovecote-uxmal-yucatan-mexico

 

USA, Europe, Iran, Uganda, Brasil, Egypt, Israel :

http://www.bigpictureagriculture.com/2011/08/raising-pigeons-and-examples-of-pigeon.html

 

Thank you all

0

Share this post


Link to post

- CONCERNING THE MODERN DOVECOTES : First, we think that pigeon transporter (such as : http://www.commercialmotor.com/big-lorry-blog/racing-and-homing-pigeons-retu#.UR4xUBKarTo) should be exclude of this category. We can precise in our description that dovecotes must be statics ones.

 

We need for your help about modern dovecote structure. It is obvious that the modern dovecote presented by Tante.Hossi could be accepted. But what do you think about those pigeons lofts presented by TMOB or here http://trainingracingpigeons.net/racing-pigeon-lofts-considering-the-top-spot-along-with-the-right-care/ and here http://www.westerncapepigeonracing.co.za/leukes_brothers.htm ?

We don’t think they have a lot of interest because they are more cages than dovecotes. Do you think we can exclude them ? and if yes how ?

 

And what about those little gardens’ dovecotes (http://www.dovecotes.org/rivington-dovecotes.html) ? Some of them could be pretty but we think that they are too small for our category. We may exclude them by specifying that the dovecote should not be transportable by one person. What do you think ?

 

First, I wonder if another major issue with garden dovecotes would be that they are not publicly accesible? I have seen these on-line for home garden use -- they ARE very small.

 

I have never seen any racing pigeon lofts -- gotta run! More thoughts later

0

Share this post


Link to post

Dovecote is the generic name for a place to breed avian food. Yes originally Dovecotes were a place to grow meat for the table in UK. The rear of the nesting hole was accessible to take the bird and its young, for the table.

 

Here we also had ponds in the grounds of large houses where fish were caught for the table. Deer Parks also existed where the Lord of the Manor chased deer for the banquets, to feed visiting notaries. Look on a map for a circular area with no roads across it, probably heavily wooded now, called "something Park" and it was almost certainly a chase where meat was stored on the hoof.

This could be an example New Park and Old Park?

 

I digress.

Dovecotes are no longer used for their original purpose, which was to provide meat at certain times of the year. They come in many forms from free standing to built in to the building. Nowadays they just provide decorative housing for flocks of avian visitors because we nearly all use the supermarket or butcher for local game meat.

 

The pyramid of holes in Guilder Mill, Hallbeck was a dovecote.

86645211.jpg

 

Modern pigeon lofts are not wanted. I doubt whether pigeon fanciers would eat their racing birds.

The dovecote needs to have been a source of food. As I said nowadays we forage in the supermarket.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks Tmob for showing me this tread.

 

Well, did this ideia died?! @Chickilim, can it return to discussion?

0

Share this post


Link to post

First of all I would like to apologize to the waymarkers who actively participated in this topic in February... 2013 and who wondered why I did not persevere in this category?

I noted that the issue was raised again in 2014 here.

 

After almost four years, I come back to present a new description that takes into account the different remarks made during the first Peer Review and in this topic.

 

I asked Marine Biologist, Benchmark Blasterz and Alfouine to be officers in the group Pigeon Squadron that will manage this category if accepted by the community.

 

We count on your remarks and suggestions to improve all that can still be, hoping of course that the idea of a category for dovecotes interest you. ;)

 

----------------------------------------

 

[Waymark Category Formal Name]

Dovecotes

 

[select Category]

Buildings

 

[Describe your waymark category in one or two sentences (no html)]

The purpose of this category is to discover the incredible variety of these pigeon houses that were built by humans from historic times to the present day throughout the world.

[Please define the waymark that should be placed in this category:]

A dovecote is a structure intended to house pigeons or doves. Dovecotes may be free-standing structures in a variety of shapes, or built into the end of a house or barn. They generally contain pigeonholes for the birds to nest.

– Source: Wikipedia -

 

3218bae5-d06d-4e41-bc07-11c9ae12dfe7.jpg

 

To be eligible in this category, the dovecote can be:

- a free-standing building,

- built above or as part of a façade of a castle/house/barn or

- carved into a cliff (troglodytes).

However, in all cases, pigeons historically must have been or currently must be able to enter and leave the building freely.

 

3b5e3061-a403-4582-b54a-6adcf62dcfd1.jpg0f163462-b146-4f19-a367-22219b08fffd.jpgce17e05f-5686-4357-82a9-f13acdf3cd51.jpg

 

It does not matter if the dovecote still houses pigeons or not because the value of this category is mainly architectural and not ornithological. Therefore, even dovecotes that have been converted into housing or are now used for other purposes will still be accepted.

Dovecote ruins will also be accepted if a visible part of their architecture still exists.

 

d1367c11-8703-4db7-94cf-362d81e7af4b.jpg

 

What we are NOT looking for:

- bird houses (there is already a category for these here).

However, to allow some modern dovecotes to be included in this category, we will accept structures that were designed to house at least 20 pigeons and that are so large that they could not be moved without heavy equipment.

 

- cages or aviaries (there is already a category for these here).

These structures are mainly of ornithological, not architectural, interest.

 

- pigeon transporters, such as trucks for pigeon racing.

The dovecote must be a static building, not a vehicle.

 

cdca295a-8091-49ad-b375-b5eaa13fc76a.jpg82452464-d43c-4a8d-a7c6-f815cca1eb10.jpgca0e9dad-3b63-4c02-9da1-72af4080a39b.jpg

dc978895-c829-4eda-aceb-db4293b2f728.jpg794be41c-8493-4335-90c0-7126746afa09.jpg

 

[Please list any specific requirements for posting a new waymark in this category:]

Required: two original photos taken by you. One photo must be of the entire dovecote (this should be the default photo) and a second photo must highlight a particular detail of the dovecote, or provide a more distant view of the dovecote and its surrounding area.

 

Any information about the dovecote (eg: century of construction, name of the domain to which it belongs or belonged, building's condition, presence or not of pigeons, current use) would be appreciated.

 

Please make every attempt to follow the naming convention below:

Place - City, State, Country (eg: Manor of Ango - Dieppe, Seine-Maritime, France)

 

Optional variable: Approximately how many pigeonholes (boulins) does the dovecote have?

This question is important because in many countries the number of pigeonholes allowed was established according to the surface area of the domain owned by the owner of the dovecote.

If you are able to answer this question, you will contribute information about the history of the area.

 

[Please list any specific requirements for posting a new log for waymarks of this category:]

The only condition to visit a Dovecote waymark is to upload at least one personal photo of the structure. Also, tell us a little about your visit and your opinion about its architecture.

 

[Please enter up to 10 keywords, separated by spaces:]

dovecote pigeonnier pigeonaire colombier columbaria palomar Taubenschlag duivenkot holubník pombal

 

Edited by Chickilim
0

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for bringing this topic back into discussion!

And thanks for your work! Your new description looks good to me. The good example pictures are very helpful.

I see no problem why this category should not pass Peer Review and complete the existing categories.

0

Share this post


Link to post

A very nice presentation for this category, very complete and unambiguous, congratulations "Chickilim"

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well done! Thanks for the great photo array of dovecotes in many different countries and a clear description of what will and won't be accepted.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This looks quite well done, lots of time went into the write up, I see.

 

A suggestion would be to change the desired category (Department, actually) from Buildings to Structures. Though many of your examples are, indeed, buildings, too many are structures. I'm pretty sure this would be accepted by the PTB in Structures.

 

Other than that, I see no nits worth picking.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The suggestion of BK-Hunters regarding the change of category group from Buildings to Structures seems fair to me.

What does the community think about it?

0

Share this post


Link to post

A structure is a thing constructed; a complex construction or entity. Not a building.

 

A building is a structure that has a roof and walls and stands more or less permanently in one place.

 

I don't think the choice is important.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is a great subject for a category (I have thought about it myself). I missed the vote but we should definitely keep working on this until it succeeds.

0

Share this post


Link to post

A structure is a thing constructed; a complex construction or entity. Not a building.

 

A building is a structure that has a roof and walls and stands more or less permanently in one place.

 

I don't think the choice is important.

 

It's important in that all buildings are structures but not all structures are buildings. Ergo, a building could, if necessary, be included in Structures, but I would have difficulty including many structures in Buildings. In other words, all the items pictured in the proposal could be considered structures, but not all could be considered buildings.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The suggestion of BK-Hunters regarding the change of category group from Buildings to Structures seems fair to me.

What does the community think about it?

I would go with structures for dovecotes.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't read anywhere in this forum as to why these dovecotes can't be submitted into the existing Unique Bird Houses category? It seems these bird structures would complement the category very well. Why do the officers feel a new category is justified? That also hasn't been addressed in this forum. Until those issues are discussed, I cannot vote 'Yea' for the category proposal.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Go vote!!!

Edited by elyob
0

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't read anywhere in this forum as to why these dovecotes can't be submitted into the existing Unique Bird Houses category?

 

Well, crap, never even thought of that. That's possibly the most important observation yet made here!

 

EDIT: It helps to read the category requirements first. I now disagree in that a great many potential dovecotes would be disallowed in Birdhouses. Had the Dovecotes category existed at the time, Birdhouses may well have proscribed them when it was created.

Edited by BK-Hunters
0

Share this post


Link to post

The category description for unique bird houses states very clearly that the birdhouse must be decorated and painted, and cannot be a freestanding building.

 

See the photos of dovecotes -- these are buildings, or large structures not (to my mind anyway) at all like a unique bird house.

 

Also the purpose of a dovecote and a birdhouse is different. One builds a birdhouse to attract and feed and enjoy the little birdies, while adding a decorative element to one's yard. One builds (or preserves from ancient times) a dovecote to house a particular kind or two of big juicy birdies to eat them.

 

For these reasons we do not believe that dovecotes can be jammed into Unique Birdhouses.

 

We look forward to Waymarking a dovecote :) We even know where one is :)

Edited by Benchmark Blasterz
0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, We thought the melting pot of photos in our description was sufficiently explicit to clearly show the difference between "Unique Bird Houses" and "Dovecotes" but visibly not enough for some.

 

First of all, I must say that I love the category "Unique Bird Houses" which allows us to discover incredible fabrications!

 

Of course, Dovecotes are bird houses etymologically speaking, but if you look, as I did, each 236 waymarks in the "Unique Bird Houses" category you will see mostly bird shelters. And it's normal because the first sentence of the description is: "This category is only open to painted or decorated" UNIQUE BIRDHOUSES "(Close-ups only !!!) ".

Try to get permission to paint or decorate this dovecote classified as historic monument and I would offer you a bottle of champagne if you succeed ;) ! And you may know that just in Europe there are several thousand like this.

Too bad the category was not called "Unique Bird Shelters", it would have saved a lot of discussions here :) !

Moreover it is also specified that standing structures are not accepted whereas it is the case of the majority of the dovecotes that we wish to waymark in this category.

 

Some other major differences between these two categories:

 

Birdhouses: small shelters

Dovecotes: big structures or buildings

 

Birdhouses: mostly constructed of wood by one person

Dovecotes: mostly built in stone by several people

 

Birdhouses: main decorative interest

Dovecotes: main architectural interest

 

Birdhouses: main vocation observation and refuge for the winter

Dovecotes: main vocation breeding and housing all year round

 

Birdhouses: designed for garden birds and sometimes pigeons or doves

Dovecotes: exclusively for pigeons or doves

 

Birdhouses: capacity of some birds

Dovecotes: capacity of 20 to 3 000 birds

 

Birdhouses: located in private gardens or sometimes in the city centers for the largest

Dovecotes: located in areas of castles and farms in the country

 

Birdhouses: rarely older than a few decades

Dovecotes: mostly aged several hundred years

 

Birdhouses: almost never classified historical monuments

Dovecotes: often classified historical monuments

 

By staying on a strict architectural point of view, it would be curious to gather in only one category delightful Modern wooden Chapels and imposing Roman Cathedrals of stone. Don't you think so ?..

Edited by Chickilim
0

Share this post


Link to post

Chickilim, good luck convincing others to see your point. We do agree these cannot be submitted in the Unique Bird House category. Those smaller decorative bird houses will most likely be declined with a request to submit to the Unique Bird House category first and if declined there, then officers can reconsidered it in Dovecotes. Happens all the time.

 

As you may know, this was an objection with the category recently in peer review. It was never an issue, however it became an issue during peer review.

 

The difficulty is once the redundant issue gains momentum few voters return to the forum to read further explanations, or some may not have read the discussion about the proposal on the forum before peer review.

 

Overall, I think it will pass. You got our "yea" vote.

Edited by BK-Hunters
0

Share this post


Link to post

I like the idea but I see problems in the category description. You took pictures from the internet for your examples. You gave no credit and the fact that you took so many pictures I assume you didn't ask the photographer. This could leed to copyright issues. Better a link to these, or you put in pictures you took by yourself. I would change my vote if this would be changed. Thanks, -lumbricus

0

Share this post


Link to post

lumbricus, you're right and I'm very attached like you to the copyright on Internet. I already have in my possession enough dovecotes photos of which I have acquired the rights to replace those that are not mine and for which I have not yet received authorization.

I hope to have time to redo the melting pot including the flags before the end of the peer review to make you change your vote. But in any case, know that in the end all the photos of the description will be legally published.

Edited by Chickilim
0

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure we can stipulate category group. PTB choose in the end IMHO We just suggest

0

Share this post


Link to post

lumbricus, you're right and I'm very attached like you to the copyright on Internet. I already have in my possession enough dovecotes photos of which I have acquired the rights to replace those that are not mine and for which I have not yet received authorization.

I hope to have time to redo the melting pot including the flags before the end of the peer review to make you change your vote. But in any case, know that in the end all the photos of the description will be legally published.

You cannot change anything during peer review. The category description is blocked during this step. So it is guaranteed that everyone votes on the exactly same proposal. You can replace the problem pictures as soon as the voting process is over and the final decision is made. For me, this is soon enough.

 

To have the rights to use a picture is often not enough. You have to correctly attribute them. For example, the Creative Commons license, that comes with most of the pictures found on Wikipedia, requires you to name the author and the license. You can find examples how this can be done in the category description of two categories I created: Carriages and Coaches on Permanent Display and Charnel Chapels, Charnel Houses and Ossuaries (both at the bottom of the Expanded description, before the posting instructions).

Edited by fi67
0

Share this post


Link to post

My Peer Review comment: "After reading the forums, the officers of this new category proposal are correct. The current Unique Bird Houses category would not accept them per the category rules. BUT... No attempt was made to reach out to the leader of the Unique Bird Houses category to see if he would be willing to include dovecotes as an addition to the category. I'm all for new categories but when I see an opportunity to make an addition to an existing category rather than create a whole new category, I'd much rather see category additions (I like categories being inclusive then exclusive). For this reason, I'm abstaining from voting."

0

Share this post


Link to post

Good idea and good presentation. I hope is't a new catégory in a few days !

0

Share this post


Link to post

When did it become a requirement to reach out to category owners who developed a cool category and got their vision of a cool category through peer review, to ask them to change their vision and category from what they created to add something else that clearly does not fit and was specifically excluded at the time of creation?

 

When did we stop respecting the specifics of categories created by others, some of which are very exclusive, to demand that now they be inclusive?

 

I do not think the dovecotes category creator needed to reach out to he Unique Birdhouses creator and say hey - can I cram my dovecotes (that you specifically excluded from your category) in there anyway, thereby not only destroying your enjoyment of a category you conceived of and created to catalogue items that you love, but also depriving me of that same joy, to come up with a unique (and dovecotes ARE unique) category of my own -- in the name of inclusiveness.

 

I'm happy to go chase another icon - isn't that the fun of this hobby? Others maybe are not looking forward to a grid challenge, but to each his/her own.

 

The category criteria set out for us by Groundspeak are:

 

Global

 

Not redundant

 

Prevalent

 

Interesting/Informative

 

I don't see in those -- "expansion of an existing category to include these items was previously declined by another category owner."

 

I think categories that have a clearly-defined item they seek are the best. Unique Birdhouses, as it is currently written, is one of those categories - you see one you know it. No need in my view to muddy the UB waters when a whole new dovecotes category will keep bright lines in place about what thing goes in what category.

 

My 2 cents

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5