Jump to content

Talk:Companion dog

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shannonk2799 (talk | contribs) at 03:44, 21 October 2017 (Peer Review: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconDogs Start‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Dogs To-do:

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

Hello

Hi! -Ye Olde Luke 03:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

typo?

In the list, is "Dobermann" a typo? I know Americans don't spell it like that, but don't know about the rest of the world. 04:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

"Dobermann" is an alternative spelling, common in Europe for example. It's arguably the "correct" spelling (I'm not arguing this, mind you), as the dog is named after Karl Friedrich Louis Dobermann, but either is fine. See Doberman Pinscher. Winston365 (talk) 05:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AKC Companion Dog vs "a companion dog"

I don't think the latter is worthy of a separate page, but I also think this page should more clearly presented that we're talking about an AKC concept, not a law of nature on this page. Also, I think the redirect for "pet dog" should perhaps point to the "As pets" section of the Dog page, instead of here. Thoughts? 184.98.118.157 (talk) 15:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

I really enjoyed the pictures included and felt as though they guarded the article. The article content is all relevant, and I really felt the working dog comparison was necessary. The article can be considered neutral but may be favorable to companion dogs slightly. The citations I checked seemed to also work, and I do not believe anything else needed to be cited. I would add possible data about the amount of companion dogs worldwide there are if anything had to be added to this. All information is up to date. Very solid overall.