Talk:Staffordshire Bull Terrier

Dogs Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, 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.DogsWikipedia:WikiProject DogsTemplate:WikiProject DogsDogs articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

WikiProject Dogs To-do:

Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Dogs:

Recent changes patrol: members can review the recent changes list to be aware of improvements or vandalism.
Expand and improve citations: Akita (dog), American Bully, Artois Hound, Azawakh, Barbet (dog), Basset Fauve de Bretagne, Bavarian Mountain Hound, Bearded Collie, Beauceron, Berger Picard, Black and Tan Terrier, Black Norwegian Elkhound, Border Collie, Border Terrier, Bouvier des Ardennes, Bouvier des Flandres, Braque du Bourbonnais, Brazilian Terrier, Briquet Griffon Vendéen, Brittany (dog), Bullenbeisser, Bull Terrier, Ca de Bou, Cairn Terrier, Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Campeiro Bulldog, Central Asian Shepherd Dog, Chilean Terrier, Chow Chow, Colombian Fino Hound, Corsican Dog, Cretan Hound, Croatian Sheepdog, Czechoslovakian Wolfdog, Danish Spitz, Dingo, Dobermann, Dogue Brasileiro, Dunker, East Siberian Laika, English Cocker Spaniel, English Foxhound, English Toy Terrier (Black & Tan), Erbi Txakur, Estonian Hound, Estrela Mountain Dog, Finnish Lapphund, Flat-coated Retriever, French Bulldog, Galgo Español, Gaucho sheepdog, German Hound, German Shepherd, German Wirehaired Pointer, Glen of Imaal Terrier, Gordon Setter, Great Dane, Greek Harehound, Griffon Bruxellois, Guatemalan Dogo, Gull Dong, Halden Hound, Hamiltonstövare, Hanover Hound, Havanese dog, Hokkaido (dog), Hovawart, Ibizan Hound, Icelandic Sheepdog, Indian Spitz, Irish Setter, Irish Terrier, Irish Water Spaniel, Istrian Coarse-haired Hound, Jagdterrier, Jämthund, Kai Ken, Karakachan dog, Karelian Bear Dog, Karst Shepherd, Keeshond, Kokoni, Kooikerhondje, Koolie, Kuchi dog, Kuvasz, Labrador Retriever, Large Münsterländer, Lucas Terrier, Magyar Agár, Miniature Bull Terrier, Miniature Fox Terrier, Mongrel, Mountain Cur, Northern Inuit Dog, Norwegian Elkhound, Norwich Terrier, Old Danish Pointer, Old English Bulldog, Old English Sheepdog, Pastor Garafiano, Pastore della Lessinia e del Lagorai, Patterdale Terrier, Pekingese, Perro Majorero, Peruvian Hairless Dog, Petit Basset Griffon Vendéen, Pharaoh Hound, Plummer Terrier, Plott Hound, Polish Greyhound, Porcelaine, Portuguese Water Dog, Pudelpointer, Rajapalayam dog, Rat Terrier, Saarloos wolfdog, Sabueso Español, Saint Miguel Cattle Dog, Šarplaninac, Schipperke, Serrano Bulldog, Shikoku dog, Skye Terrier, Sloughi, Slovak Cuvac, Small Münsterländer, Smithfield (dog), Smooth Collie, South Russian Ovcharka, Spanish Water Dog, Standard Schnauzer, Swedish Vallhund, Tatra Shepherd Dog, Terceira Mastiff, Thai Bangkaew Dog, Tibetan Mastiff, Tibetan spaniel, Tornjak, Weimaraner, Welsh Hound, Welsh Terrier, West Siberian Laika, Westphalian Dachsbracke, Xoloitzcuintle, Xigou
Stub class articles in need of development: Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, Argentine pila dog, Armant (dog), Assyrian Mastiff, Banjara Hound, Billy (dog), Braque Dupuy, Bruno Jura Hound, Bulgarian Scenthound, Ca Rater Mallorquí, Calupoh, Campeiro Bulldog, Can de Chira, Cane Paratore, Cantabrian Water Dog, Chortai, Córdoba fighting dog, Denmark Feist, East European Shepherd, English Shepherd, Faroese Sheepdog, Gończy Polski, Grand Griffon Vendéen, Gull Dong, Hanover Hound, Hygen Hound, Japanese Terrier, Kaikadi (dog), Kars dog, Koyun dog, Kunming dog, Kurdish Mastiff, Levriero Sardo, Mahratta Hound, Majorca Ratter, Maneto, Markiesje, Molossus (dog), Montenegrin Mountain Hound, Rampur Greyhound, Romanian Mioritic Shepherd Dog, Sapsali, Sarabi dog, Schweizer Laufhund, Segugio Maremmano, Segugio dell'Appennino, Sinhala Hound, St. Hubert Jura Hound, Taigan, Tatra Shepherd Dog, Tazy, Toy Bulldog, Treeing Cur, Vikhan Sheepdog, Westphalian Dachsbracke, White Shepherd
Suggested Featured Articles due for re-assessment: Beagle (2007)
Suggested Good Articles due for re-assessment: Swift fox (2008); Cavalier King Charles Spaniel (2009); Clumber Spaniel (2009); Russian Spaniel (2009); Sussex Spaniel (2009)
Requested images: Briquet de Provence, Denmark Feist, Erbi Txakur, Jeju dog, Kaikadi (dog), Kars dog, Koyun dog, Levriero Sardo, Liangshan Dog, Perdigueiro Galego, Segugio dell'Appennino, St. Hubert Jura Hound, Tarsus çatalburun, Tibetan Kyi Apso, Vikhan Sheepdog, Villanuco de Las Encartaciones

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Dubious

I marked the claim about "special empathy for children" by the NZKC as dubious. There is no doubt that the breed is known for its affinity with humans, but to claim that the breed demonstrates "special empathy" without any kind of scientific source to back it is a bit much for an encyclopedia. It smacks of opinion rather than proven fact. Mfield (talk) 23:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i agree with the above this whole page probably needs editing in the meantime i have removed the add on the the above sentence about "special empathy for children" that that is what they are most known for as this is obviously untrue, although on a personal level as an owner of a staff i think they are good with children i would never say that that is their chief claim to fame80.7.125.221 Mancgollum (talk) 13:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The owner not the dog generally determines the dog's tempremant. As a owner of a Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the mother of a 2 year old I can say from experience that my dog is great with children. This however is not true of a dog that is taught to fight it's entire life. Overall this breed can be a great addition to any family if properly trained and raised from a young age. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.71.30 (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This has already been flagged in the referencing section. "The Staffordshire Bull Terrier appeared in the top 10 breeds most suitable for families and especially children in a report researched and published by Southampton University in 1996[4]." This publication actually gives this dog a high rating for aggression. One of the terms for aggression is 'snapping at children.' Surely this is misleading in the worst way possible? Why isn't it deleted yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.54.243 (talk) 00:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC) I will delete that part, and leave this message, just incase there is a good reason for it being kept there.[reply]

NP.O.V and weasel words

This article appears to be extremely one sided towards these dogs being 'friendly'. I do not know about this breed and therefore would not like to heavily delete sections that have been made probably with a lot of knowledge, but lack citations. I find it hard to ignore, however that the article lists 6 citations to attacks by the dogs in a single sentence, but has quotations about "No breed is more loving with its family" stated virtually as fact and the following sentence has to be considered original research.

"Bad Press" is a weasel phrase, since it instantly conjours up the idea of injustice. Also the statement about the dog not experiencing lock jaw unless they have tetanus doesn't make sense, because these two things are identical.

Over all it sounds like someone with a lot of knowledge for these dogs has edited this page in the past, but has let their feelings show too much. I think it wuold be better if someone with better knowledge than myself comes and irons out these points, but i will keep an eye on this article and start deleting the more obvious problems in a week unless people would like to come and make suggestions first. 79.121.197.4 (talk) 16:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just two quick points: The claim that "No breed is more loving with its family" is properly cited. Nothing wrong with educated opinions if they are properly cited. The phrase 'bad press' is based upon the RSPCA statement that the breed had a "terrible press". It seems perfectly appropriate. Yozzer66 (talk) 09:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken on the Bad Press comment, I was a little harsh. But I still have doubts about the way that quote is used. I think it is a good quote and feel it could have a place in the article, but it needs to be presented clearly as opinion. I have some time tonight, so was intending to have a go at a larger edit of this article anyway, I'll see how it looks after that. 79.121.197.4 (talk) 17:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I second the NP.O.V. The Rottweiler article reflects much less bias and seems like a good example to follow. It seems to me that, if someone was researching a dog to go to the dog park with, and they were learning about the breed, they should come away from this article thinking that this breed was a bad breed to own. That is a common understanding. This article directs the reader far away from that conclusion. While these dogs may be people-friendly, they are not dog-friendly - they are dangerous to other dogs and to any people unlucky enough to get between the two during a scrum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mlprater (talk • contribs) 01:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Find me a WP:RS that says they are fundamentally not 'dog-friendly'. My SBT goes off-leash almost every week down the beach without incident. Because I have taken the time to socialise and train him. But unlike you instead of just a personal anecdote to back it up there is a source to cite as per the article:

'RSPCA chief vet Mark Evans said: "Staffies have had a terrible press, but this is not of their own making - in fact they're wonderful dogs. If people think that Staffies have problems, they're looking at the wrong end of the dog lead! When well cared for and properly trained they can make brilliant companions. Our experience suggests that problems occur when bad owners exploit the Staffie's desire to please by training them to show aggression."'

- Oosh (talk) 08:52, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It may "be often said" that they are "nanny dogs", but that doesn't make it true. The term applied to this breed seems to be tracable to the application by the president of the breed association in the application to the kennel club, so how reliable is the claim? Something else that is often said is that it's a very bad idea to leave small children in the care of any dog, especially one so massively strong. I've been working on the article Fatal dog attacks in the United States and have seen now case after horrific case of a child left alone with a dog and ending up dead. Repeating this "nanny dog" claim here is a very bad idea, and especially so with a type of dog so dangerously strong and powerful. Chrisrus (talk) 18:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite happy to be able to agree with Chrisrus on this one. No truly reliable source will be encouraging anyone to leave a small child alone with a dog. For a lot of these dog articles, we need to move beyond using the media, political groups, and breed-specific advocates or breed-specific blamers as sources. I understand that the writers of this article are trying to fight against a lot of misled stereotypes. But that doesn't mean it's necessary to say things like "No breed is more loving with its family." If the point is to contradict the stereotype, a more appropriate statement (if properly sourced) would be something along the lines of "The SBT, like most breeds, tends to be loving with its family."Onefireuser (talk) 13:35, 8 May 2013 (UTC)Onefireuser[reply]

"Affinity With People" Rewritten

The section headed 'Affinity With People' is questionable:

"Staffords are large-hearted and their way of showing that they love human beings does not express itself by a friendly wag of the tail and gentle lick of the tounge. This is a dog that will launch itself at visitors and even, when trained to be more controlled, will still be a fussy pet nudging and pawing the object of his affection in order to win a stroke and a pat in response. If you want a quiet reserved dog who knows his place and will wait to be asked to join in the game, then a stafford is not for you. It is recorded that fighting dogs often changed hands to settle debts or raise funds, but whatever the causes it is a well known fact that staffords are amazingly adaptable at changing home or even owners. Unfortunately, this does make them easy prey for dognappers from whom they will need protection. [14]

RSPCA chief vet Mark Evans said: "Staffies have had a terrible press, but this is not of their own making - in fact they're wonderful dogs. If people think that Staffies have problems, they're looking at the wrong end of the dog lead! When well cared for and properly trained they can make brilliant companions. Our experience suggests that problems occur when bad owners exploit the Staffie's desire to please by training them to show aggression" [15]."

I started out intending to tidy up the punctuation and spelling a little bit, but the more I read these two paragraphs the more doubtful I became. There is a reference for the claim made at the end of each paragraph (first that Staffordshires need protecting from dognappers, and second the quote from the RSPCA chap). Even so, the section reads as though it's a puff piece for the dogs, written by an obvious fan of the breed in a very casual and (in my view) unencyclopaedic style. 'Large-hearted' I can live with, just (if it's referenced); but in stating how they express their affection for humans, why start by telling the reader what they don't do? There's no need for that entire convoluted first sentence when we could just say "Staffords are very friendly towards humans and show their affection by jumping up, fussing, nudging and pawing", or some such.

Also, if something's a 'well-known fact' then it doesn't need to be in an encyclopaedia. If it does need to be in an encyclopaedia - i.e. it's notable and relevant and supported with proper references - then I don't think we should be telling the reader that it's a 'well-known fact', because it implies criticism of the reader if s/he didn't happen to know it.

Initially I wasn't going to try rewriting this section - I have to declare that I'm not at all a fan of this breed of dog. From experience I know that (whether by training or temperament) they can be extremely vicious and aggressive, and - although I recognise this isn't the dog's fault - they're the essential weapon-of-choice accessory for every wannabe in my district; so I admit I have quite a strong dislike for this breed. I'm hoping I've kept that sentiment out of my edits, though - but if anyone thinks they can improve on my fragile neutrality I'd urge them to try. Please, though, do try to keep it neutral: this is a descriptive article. It doesn't need to be a fancier's manual. - 94.194.113.136 (talk) 08:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You say that SBT's can be vicious and aggressive and your not a fan of the breed but your asking other people to be neutral??

ANY breed of dog can be vicious and aggressive,small breeds can be aggressive but are ignored or laughed at because of their size. SBT's are judged by their looks and i understand they can be intimidating but until you have owned this breed,trained this breed and helped people over come this instinct to fear them then you cannot give an honest opinion of their temprament. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.231.246 (talk) 11:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction with Pit Bull Terrier article - Are Staffy's Pits?

The lead mentions "It is an English breed of dog related to the bull terrier and its larger cousins the American Staffordshire terrier and the American pit bull terrier, the latter two being generally categorized as Pit bull terriers" without providing references for the exclusion of the Staffys from the Pit-categorization. Seeing as the sentence does communicate their close relation I would have thought they would be similarly grouped. The Pit Bull Terrier article also DOES include the Staffy's in the Pit group. I am being bold and removing the claim about categorization until clear evidence can be provided either way. - Sahmejil (talk) 14:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article to which you are referring was not "Pit Bull Terrier" but "Pit Bull". The Pit Bull article follows the convention established by numerous legal definitions (see the Breed-specific legislation article for examples) that include the Staffordshire Bull Terrier in the definition of a "pit bull-type dog". Astro$01 (talk) 18:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Staffordshire Bull Terriers are definitely pits. A pitbull is a type of dog like a retriever. There are many breeds and mixes of dogs considered retrievers. There are also many breeds and mixes of dogs that are pitbulls. Some people think that because a there is a breed called "american pit bull terrier" that those are the only pit bulls. Again this is not true, pit bull is a generic term to describe a group of dogs with similar traits. Any expert on dog breeds will support this fact.Mantion (talk) 04:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

Stop removing newly added pictures to the article, please. Not to mention the motivation, 'this is not a place to add personal puppy pictures', now those pictures are not in any way my personal pictures. Not any of those pictures were. These are not MY pictures. I am not the author, se for yourself. And when you removed the pictures you removed one adult picture as well, and left the article with only one puppy picture, by the way. The article can not possibly present a dog breed only with one breed pic in the lead, (black) and one PUPPY pic (black-blue as well). Please do not remove further pictures, we NEED more pictures. The other young dog was added mainly for its colour, white. Hafspajen (talk) 09:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You added a mix breed and another puppy with no explanation in the edit summary, so yeah I reverted the lot.

This latest lot are clearly part of a wider edit spree trying to illustrate a more diverse cross-section of the breed and I thank you for it.

If you can't complete you edit project in one sitting then you can try the template below, but always add an edit summary, we're not mind-readers. ;)

-Oosh (talk) 07:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MMMMmm, I realised that myself. The mixed breed pic. Took it away... Thanks. Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Killer Breed

This article completely glosses over the fact that this breed of do is most renowned for attacking and often killing children. The article should reflect this more. --109.246.151.191 (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two-thirds of the Description section addresses this issue, in which there is 6 references to dog attacks attributed to the breed, but it's been done a balanced and factual manner rather than the alarmist assertions you seem to advocate. -Oosh (talk) 01:27, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pit are dangerous, its well known, thank you for your concernMantion (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

deit beef doggy choc bacon steak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.240.69 (talk) 15:34, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "===Press on bad behaviour==="

This section is original research, inaccurate and lacks NPOV.

First the title reflect the behavior of the press, yet the article points out speculation that breeders and owners are using the wrong breed name. Note no one is stating that the press is doing anything wrong.

Ex. It states '...the press have reported many cases of attacks by Staffordshire Bull Terriers or dogs described as a "Staffordshire bull terrier cross".' Then states 'The RSPCA fears that breeders are renaming pit bull terriers as Staffordshire bull terriers to avoid prosecution.'

The press is reporting the breed of the dog as registered by the breeders, kennel club, and owners. You can't blame the press for correctly reporting breed of the dog correctly. Additionally Austrlia is not a state, its a country and or continent.

Next the author writes "Several media, council and government reports in New South Wales (NSW) between 2002 and 2010 identified the Staffordshire bull terrier as the leading breed of dog responsible for biting humans... in that state of Australia."

The author sites an ABC (about Jack Russell Terriers) that accurately reports Stafforshire Bull Terriers were listed as the #1 attacker in a report from NSW for the period between October and December of 2009." There is nothing about an 8 year period mentioned. I guess the wiki author is upset that ABC would share information from the NSW government.

Next the author states "However, this is likely due to the sheer number of them in the community, with only a small percentage of the breed causing an issue." and sites a paper opposing BSL by "Dr Kersti Seksel" with information about dog attacks in 90's which describes alternatives to the 1998 BSL. The papper not a scientific article nor from a credible news organization. It was the opinion of one dog behaviorist on BSL andaggressive dogs in the '90s.

Lastly the author writes "A 2012 report places the American Staffordshire Bull Terrier 19th when dog attacks are weighted by breed population in NSW". The other sites Council Reports of Dog Attacks in NSW for 2010 and 2011. The report shows that of attacks by pure bred dogs Bull Terrier (Stafforshire) were #1 in dog attacks. There were no mention of American Staffordshire bull terriers. In the end none of that matters because its all original research and nothing to do with the press.

I will repeat this section is in-accurate, primary research and opinion. I will remove it for the betterment of Wikipedia. Mantion (talk) 09:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]