Talk:Puggle/Archive 1

Archive 1

Let the article stand

OK, we've removed this article & removed it & RFDed it and voted on it and it keeps coming back. With pretty good reason--there are "286,000 English pages for puggle dog" according to google. So I give up, I think we just need to let it exist and make sure it's got reasonable info in it. IMHO. Elf | Talk 04:26, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Why shouldnt this be kept? What is the arguement for deletion?

199.201.168.100 16:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puggle (dog) and comment there. Thanks. Elf | Talk 16:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I posted puggle info over a year ago. I knew it would be back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.184.222.166 (talk) 04:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Information cleaned up but more needed

I have cleaned this page up a bit to help with formatting but it will need to need be revised as I am not certain is there is a section break instead of the line breaks.

This page needs to be revised as there is too much content that is copied from the cited site that I added. This seems to be the source from which the information originated.

4.225.91.23 00:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I saw your post and was all set to delete the obviously copyrighted material from the article, but my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to do some investigating. Take a look at this edit from Feb. 23, 2006. It looks like it created the text found at [www.pugglesforsale.com/puppy_breed_description.asp pugglesforsale] organically. So next, I did a search on the Internet Archive www.pugglesforsale.com/puppy_breed_description.asp, for the site in question, and it didn't come up with anything. In fact, a search for the home page of the site www.pugglesforsale.com/ didn't come up with anything either. The internet archive has a backlog of 6 to 12 months, so that may mean that this website is only that old. So I suspect (but could be wrong) that pugglesforsale actually copied our content. Only the section on temperament has survived relatively intact, so it looks like we copied just that section from them. Just a theory, mind. --Joelmills 02:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Added information and citations but keeps reverting

I've obviously done something wrong. Any ideas? Jennaba (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Move?

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

• Puggle (dog) → Puggle — (Discuss) — Puggle (dog) is the primary topic. The only other meaning is "a baby echidna" (similar to "puppy" or "kitten"), and there is no article about baby echidnas. A disambiguation hatnote is all that is needed. — Whatever404 (talk) 11:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
• Comment. I don't think the dab page should exist. As you say puggle (dog) is the primary topic by a country mile, but there are only two topics involved. The see also is not ambiguous so it doesn't count. So really the dab page should be deleted and the dog article at the main name with a hatnote. From WP:DAB: "If there are three or more topics associated with the same term, then a disambiguation page should normally be created for that term..."--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
• Disambig page Puggle has 3 alternatives. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
  • As I alluded above, the "see also" section listing of The Puggle Tales, which is I think what your are counting to find a third alternative, is an unambiguous and specific name and is unlikely to cause confusion for anyone. I can't imagine anyone searching for that book series entering "puggle" into a search and being confounded by reaching the article on the dog. I thus do not consider it properly a 3rd alternative.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:47, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
• Support per Fuhghettaboutit comments (except last sentence: meant "not" properly a 3rd?). The baby echidna meaning, although predating, will unlikely ever stand on its own as an article, leaving the dog breed subject as the sole occupant of the "puggle" namespace. ENeville (talk) 19:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
• Support per all the above. This is not only primary use but the only article that can take the name. Station1 (talk) 21:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links

I removed Puggle.org from the External links section, on the grounds that it fails WP:EL and WP:SPAM. This site does not serve as a unique resource as defined by WP:EL; the site is a vehicle for advertising dogs for sale and breeding. Puggle.org is just one of dozens of cookie-cutter sites made by "Four Paws Enterprise" and should not be included here. Whatever404 (talk) 20:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Do a google search. It is the best resource for puggle owners on the internet. It's been around for years before this page was even created. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elggup (talk • contribs) 00:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Nothing in your comment proves the verifiability of this site. The main content of the site is advertising, The site's TOS states: "...we provide a way for people to post puggle for sale ads, puggle want ads, stud ads, rescue ads, a way for users to contact each other, post pictures, the opportunity to view and rate puggle pictures and various other services." There is only one, very sparse page containing information on puggles, and there is a sort of "puggle MySpace" vanity area where people trade pictures of their dogs and chat about them. The majority of the traffic on the site is related to commercial sales and breeding of puggles. This link fails WP:EL, in my view. Whatever404 (talk) 01:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you are completely wrong. The site is dedicated to the breed and the owners of nearly 10,000 puggles. The puggle would be nothing like it is today without it. They have over 50,000 pictures, stories, videos, and discussion all about puggles. You are crazy if you think "The Official Home of the Puggle Hybrid Breed" is spam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elggup (talk • contribs) 01:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:EL lists "sites requiring registration" under "Links normally to be avoided". The pictures, comments, and stories are on the forums, which require registration. The rest of the content is primarily advertisements: dogs for sale, dogs available for breeding (for a fee), etc. Also, please refrain from insults per WP:CIVIL. Thanks. Whatever404 (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess you like making stuff up. You obvious have never been to the site or you would know you are lying --Elggup (talk) 17:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Leave the link to puggle.org it is great resource for all. It really is more useful then this article. There's nothing like speaking to owners first hand then what some geek writes. In my opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Janed203 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC) — Janed203 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

See above: the content, other than the ads, requires registration to view. Whatever404 (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

You must be blind if you think registration is required to view content. Do you call 50,000+ pictures, videos, 200+ polls, breedinfo, 20,000 profiles all advertisting and not content. You really have no clue.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elggup (talk • contribs) 17:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If you add the link again, your account will be blocked indefinitely as a single-purpose spam-only account. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Moved material

The following material was moved from the main page; as it was recently added and lacking appropriate sources. Whatever404 (talk) 16:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The material

The Puggle, like all hybrid dogs, are bred in different ways. For instance, Puggles may be bred as follows:

• Pug – Beagle
  
• Pug – Puggle
  
• Beagle – Puggle
  
• Puggle – Puggle
  

Eddie Royal - puggle ownership not supported by existing ref.

"The Puggle is currently the most popular crossbreed ever, and a must have in many people's eyes." - Not a reliable source.

Pocket puggles tend to be between 8 and 16 pounds. The only differences in Toy and Standard is size and toys tend to be less wrinkled. There is no difference in temperament. Toys are bred with a smaller parents. Toy puggles are bred using Olde English Pocket beagle females and pocket pugs. - Already established that puggle.org is not a reliable source.

Healthy puggles can generally live a healthy life of fourteen years. Puggles also enjoy eating and have hearty appetites. Care needs to be taken to ensure that this breed doesn’t overeat, as obesity can become a health concern. - need sources

Try to limit bath time to once a month to avoid dry, itchy skin. - remove instructions, WP is not an instruction manual (WP:NOT)

Puggles like routine and tend to be stubborn dogs. Housebreaking can sometimes be difficult with Puggles, but owners can more easily improve their Puggle's skills using positive reinforcement. Some puggles have even been known to be trained in a liter box. Puggles can easily learn the basic commands and more challenging commands with classes. Barking can vary greatly from dog to dog. However, Puggle are not notorious for their bad barking habits. Yet, they can become problematic if not discouraged early on. — Preceding comment added by Whatever404 (talk · contribs) 16:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

References

Puggle.org external link

I note the discussion above where it was stated that the content of the puggle.org site was not accessible without registration.

This does not seem to be the case any more, and the site appears to have a respectable amount of valid, non-commercial content on the topic (in addition to the aforementioned commercial content). Consequently I do not see any reason to prohibit its inclusion any longer. Manning (talk) 06:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

This page needs a disambiguation

"puggle" is the term for a baby echidna. The term pre-dates the usage of the term for a mixed-breed dog. There should probably be a disambiguation of some sort, here. Rmd1023 (talk) 21:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It used to have a hatnote (see #Move?). I restored it. Station1 (talk) 05:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

facts about puggles

puggles are very cute they play nice with kids because they are small like kids —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.65.195 (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

This article isn't exactly the best...

But it's been invaluable to me.

I inherited a puggle from an irresponsible owner, and the info about the breed listed here has been a lot of help in working with him. Honestly, if my dog is typical (as it seems he is), this so-called "designer breed" is a dream dog.

Is there any authoritative editor who can attest to the temperment of this mix? We can walk ours without a leash, let him around other dogs with no biting (the occasional growl is permitted, but that 's where it ends) and people actually pet him WHILE THEY'RE EATING at cafes. It's unsanitary, true, but people don't seem to be able to help it. A woman at a coffeehouse in a major city took off her shoes and gave my dog a back massage with her feet while she drank her latte. I'm not kidding.

While I'm not a fan of designer pups, I came across mine by default, and I'm thrilled. I think a more expansive article on the breed just might be in order. My own experience violates the original research restriction for Wikipedia, so I'm right out. Any puggle breeders out there want to weigh in? I'm sold. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfulbright (talk • contribs) 04:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that more information about the crossbreed itself (the subject of the article) needs to be added. About half of the information is about the misdeeds of the first man who sold crosses between pugs and beagles. None of this information is relevant to a person wanting to learn about the crossbreed itself. If this man is deserving of his own article, this information should be moved. Otherwise, it should be deleted.

The term "designer dog" should be removed from the article since it is pejorative and without meaning. What dog breed isn't "designed"? All breeds become distinctive through selective mating directed by man. Puggles are no more "designed" than greyhounds or Boston terriers.

The health section only contains one citation to a Fox News article that says nothing about health. Generally, a cross is healthier than than the purebred since since the cross will have a greater diversity in its genetic background (i.e. less inbreeding). As it is, the health section deserves deletion but it's absence would leave only a couple sentences about the crossbreed itself.

I am not a puggle owner (we're looking to get a dog), but this article seems hostile to the idea that pugs and beagles can be crossbred and that the result is a popular dog. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.85.160.151 (talk) 10:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the above. This article used to be much more comprehensive. Now it is primarily a hatchet job for the AKC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.63.123.101 (talk) 19:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Question

the article says a Puggle needs a Beagle parent and a Pug parent, but can't a Puggle also have 2 puggle parents?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmoustache14 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 24 December 2012

While you could do it, the original F1 generation will have different dominate genes compared to following generations; F2, F3, and so on. These changes could cause the animal to look different. You can see it with Savannah cats where there is distinct temperament and size differences as the generations get further away from the original parents. I would consider them all Puggles, so maybe this section needs to be reworded User226 (talk) 21:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I looked into it some more and it seems the current wording is correct. With "Designer Dogs", they are looking for that first generation. See List_of_dog_hybrids. Maybe someone else has some other information on this topic. User226 (talk) 22:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Odd phrasing to begin Overview section

It reads:

Wisconsin breeder Wallace Havens bred the first puggle in the 1980s. Although Havens was the first to officially breed a puggle, the history of puggles dates back to the 1980s when U.S. breeders experimented with creating new dogs.

The second sentence is phrased as though it should contradict the first, but neither sentence is more specific than "the 1980s".

This is extremely confusing. Does anyone know what this is actually trying to say?

1980fast (talk) 21:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree, I have conducted a rewrite introducing a new source that clarifies the above. Kind regards, Cavalryman (talk) 02:53, 29 June 2020 (UTC).