Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dogs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Dogs (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and Dogs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.


Akita (dog), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article.

I'm just commenting so that this has a date and the archival bot will catch this. --TKK! bark with me! 04:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

infobox cleanup[edit]

I have started to look at fixing information in an infobox and went to {{Infobox_dog_breed}} where discovered that the explanation of parameters was outdated. I have a left a comment on the talk page there but I figured it was a good idea to cross post here both to get it noticed and because there may be other issues people here could add.Jemmaca (talk) 06:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

  • [posting same response here as at INFOBOXFLAG template talk] - FCI re-vamped all of its website a few months ago - changing the links to all breed standards resulting in 404 errors. So far I have fixed all the Gundogs, all the terriers and several others breeds if I was editing them for something else. SagaciousPhil - Chat 07:06, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
  • since I figure broken links are within my limited skill-set I decided to tackle the breed standards. I have gotten most of the way through the A dogs. It is not just the FCI ones that are broken so it is a bit slow going.(I was sure happy when I hit a terrier because SagaciousPhil had already fixed it) Would not mind if someone had a look to make sure they are happy with the result before I get too far along the alphabet.Jemmaca (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Dog articles would need more knowledgeable content editing and reliable references than this. Here's an other editor just fixing links. Suddenly there are like a bunch of them everywhere. Better do some real work, here are some dog articles that need attention: Šarplaninac, Schweizer Laufhund, Bone mouth, Romanian Raven Shepherd Dog, Cane di Oropa, Combai, Old Danish Pointer, Berger Blanc Suisse, Bosnian Coarse-haired Hound, These articles needs experts. Dumfriesshire Hound? Hafspajen (talk) 21:17, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Well I am certainly not a content expert but did figure proper breed standard links (to FCI and CKC for example) would be easy and not needing an expert. But as you disagree I will stop and leave it to you folks. Thanks for looking and the feedback.Jemmaca (talk) 21:50, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Don't be a fucking asshole. People do what they are willing and able to. This sort of cleanup work is common even among established editors. --Dodo bird (talk) 01:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Hey, how about dial it way, way back. It's not clear at all what you are even mad about. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 02:45, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Okay so I am confused. My initial reaction to Hafspajen's response was that while I was being told to piss off I was not bothered because I simply assumed that they were not happy with my changed links and trying to remind me that really dog experts should be the ones editing dog pages. I stopped my little foray into fixing the links and deleted my draft of changes to Russian Black terrier (the whole reason I ended up here in the first place). But I did not remove the dog pages I had added to my watch list and today I ended back at Beagle and made a simple change and commented on someone's reference. And 3 things struck me. 1 - I get paid good money to post academic articles and ensure the referencing is appropriate as a small part of my job so that means I am qualified to fix breed standard links even if I am not a dog expert, 2 - those links are not fixed on the Beagle page and 3 - I did not know if I should change them because no one actually answered my question. I wanted to know if the manner I was changing them met the needs of the people here know how they want it to look. And if someone cares to let me know what the desired look is I will ensure that the many hundreds of broken breed standard links are fixed including the ones on Beagles.Jemmaca (talk) 10:24, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
    • @Jammaca: the links you've fixed look fine to me; it's a monotonous task! I think I've done the links on the Beagle article now. SagaciousPhil - Chat 12:38, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Well it is a monstrous task but certainly doable. I am wishing it were all a bit more monotonous as I have spent time actually scanning the standards and the infoboxes and adding stuff where it is obvious. I have so far gotten to Berner Niederlaufhund. This article needs to be merged into Schweizerischer Niederlaufhund in my opinion. And it seems so obvious to me that part of me thinks I should simply find some time and do it. But I am a believer in getting a second opinion and gathering wider consensus if need be. Going through the whole process of adding it to Wikipedia:Proposed mergers seems overkill to me. Thoughts?Jemmaca (talk) 07:59, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

International Designer Canine Registry[edit]

Thoughts on the use of the International Designer Canine Registry as a source? --TKK! bark with me! 21:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't think it was suitable - looks as if providing someone stumps up some money they get a bit of laminated paper without any checking at all. Money seems to be the prime motivation - the registration form states: "All applications are destroyed within 48 hours if payment is not recieved." [They can't even spell received ... Face-wink.svg]. SagaciousPhil - Chat 11:02, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

AfC article[edit]

I found Draft:One Million Pibble March while working AfC and thought someone here might want to work on it. It looks like it's probably notable so I saved it from G13 but it needs a lot of tlc --TKK! bark with me! 00:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Edits on Dog and Origin of the domestic dog[edit]


Sagaciousphil and anyone else, can you take a look at the recent edits in the last a few months on these both pages, and especially Origin of the domestic dog. Do we remove every earlier research because they slightly differs from the new one? One of the editor (William Harris) continues to do so. Discussion at Talk:Origin of the domestic dog#Western Europe and Eurasia. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 00:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

  • I would suggest that both pieces of research should be included. Perhaps a wording could be agreed between the two editors along the lines of: "research undertaken by blah blah blah in (year) indicated Eurasian origins but more recently in (year) studies by blah blah blah show a European (or whatever)" Hafspajen (talk) 10:30, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • "Asia and Europe", that's how we shall refer, but then both terms are properly covered under "Eurasia". OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 10:32, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Use "Asia and Europe". Hafspajen (talk) 10:57, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live![edit]

WikiProject X icon.svg

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


Draft:Guide Dogs NSW/ACT - thoughts? --TKK! bark with me! 01:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

@Tikuko: Notable. I think that there is no problem in moving the draft. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 02:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
I can't approve the draft because the only reference is to the organization itself. --TKK! bark with me! 03:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Check now? I have added 2 sources. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 04:28, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Alright. I'll clean it up a bit and then approve it. --TKK! bark with me! 00:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

New wolf subspecies article[edit]

Please see Canis lupus variabilis that I have just accepted at AFC. It's a rather basic article with some rough edges - e.g. it's lacking a Taxobox - so it needs some TLC. Please also integrate it into the Subspecies of Canis lupus list article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:13, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dodger67: Yes he had created the article after the discussion on my UTP and I had checked it a few minutes ago. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 14:19, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Ok, so are you going to fix up the article? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:15, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I would also inform the creator. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 00:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Excellent, thanks. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:47, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

Think I let you know: at Talk:Pit bull somebody proposed merger of "Pit bull" - "American Staffordshire Terrier" and "American Pit Bull Terrier." ... Hafspajen (talk) 22:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

health section on mongrels should be altered[edit]

altered to remove the line on hybrid vigor.

i have tried to edit it and was told i was wrong and sent to a part of wiki that was incorrect so now i believe i am in the right place but who really knows anymore.

i gave the links to the studies and the results TWICE

This has been shown in a recent study in June 1, 2013 by the Journal of american veterinary medical association[14] Where with a large study of mutts and purebreds it was shown that mutts have no less risk than a purebred does of genetic related disorders. It was found that mutts had a higher risk of cranial cruciate ligament tears than did their purebred counterparts and that while both are equally susceptible to genetic disorders Purebreds with genetic disorders were limited to certain bloodlines with the particular disorder.[15]

Populations are particularly vulnerable when the dogs bred are closely related. Inbreeding among purebreds has exposed various genetic health problems not always readily apparent in less uniform populations. Mixed-breed dogs are more genetically diverse due to the more haphazard nature of their parents' mating. However, "haphazard" is not the same as "random" to a geneticist. The offspring of such matings might be less likely to express certain genetic disorders because there might be a decreased chance that both parents carry the same detrimental recessive alleles, but some deleterious recessives occur across many seemingly unrelated breeds, and therefore merely mixing breeds is no guarantee of genetic health. Also, when two poor specimens are bred, the offspring could inherit the worst traits of both parents. This is commonly seen in dogs from puppy mills.[16]

"June 1 Journal of American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) researchers studied the medical records of 62,750 dogs diagnosed with genetic disorders during a 15 year period.

The study, titled, Prevalence of inherited disorders among mixed-breed and purebred dogs: 27,254 cases (1995–2010), Studied prevalence of 24 genetic disorders in the population.

Ten disorders were found to be more common in purebred dogs, purebred dogs had no higher incidence than did mixed breed dogs of health concerns. Mixed breed dogs had a higher prevalence of cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) tears than did purebred dogs.

According to the researchers, the study illustrates that for most heritable diseases mixed breeds confer no greater over all health. Heritable diseases clearly run in some pure bred lines, however according to the researchers, thirteen of the 24 diseases studied were present across the entire canine population prior to breeding for specific traits, and are therefore just as likely to show up in a mixed breed dog as a purebred.

Heritable diseases can be devastating for pet owners; knowing the history of a dog's lineage may provide a buffer against some of these issues. In-breeding has certainly led some breeds to have a high incidence for some diseases, and mixes derived from that breed can suffer from the same set of issues."


Sirius is a star system, and this project page links to said star system. I would remove it, but it is actually a featured article, so I'm just going to inquire if that article was in some way rewritten by dedicators of this project? Jacedc (talk) 22:31, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Ah, never mind. A curious thing, this article does fall under WikiProject Dogs, as it's colloquially referred to as the "Dog Star". Hmm. Jacedc (talk) 22:32, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Why dog project? Hafspajen (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Can't notice any disscusions even on latest page move[edit]

Moved back page move to Rhodesian ridgeback from Rhodesian Ridgeback. Rhodesian Ridgeback is the breed name. as the page per Kennel Club Standard - as per AKC, Dog Breeds, Rhodesian Ridgeback. We use the names as given in breed standard. Hafspajen (talk) 09:10, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

  • I have told the editor in question not to add controversial page move requests into uncontroversial technical requests. OccultZone (TalkContributionsLog) 09:53, 4 March 2015 (UTC)